by Emily Mah
“What do you really want?” is a question that readers should ask the characters of Mary Wollstonecraft’s Mary, A Fiction and Ibn Tufayl’s Hayy Ibn Yaqzan. These characters exhibit varying levels of awareness about the societies in which they belong, often taking widely accepted truths for granted. The acceptance of these truths leads the characters to make shallow and sometimes bizarre decisions, prompting readers to question: what does traditional education actually teach? This question is a central theme in Wollstonecraft’s fiction, creating tension between self-educated Mary and wider European society. The story of Absal in Hayy Ibn Yaqzan unifies both forms of education, revealing the role of this tension in creating a harmonized conception of one’s world. In both books, the prominence of self education demonstrates that one must gain the ability to make one’s own choices through the formation of authentic ideas to become truly autonomous. The journey from conformity to autonomy exemplifies how Mary and Absal become aware of and challenge regimes of truth in their societies, demonstrating its limitations on the self-authority of both subjugators and the subjugated. Ultimately, when seen through the lens of Michel Foucault’s “Truth and Power” and John Mill’s On Liberty, these texts reveal that individual autonomy and societal “truths” are intertwined. In doing so, they imply that both individual and societal conditions must be met to achieve the greatest level of autonomy.
OVERVIEW OF THEORIES AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
To understand their significance in relation to self education, connections must first be drawn between Mill and Foucault’s theories. Foucault’s “Truth and Power” posits that power dynamics such as those between “class positions” shape prevailing notions of “truth.”[1] These truths determine the behaviours and objects that people perceive as desirable or undesirable. While one can choose between desirable and undesirable things, such notions are often predetermined by institutions such as schools which teach social norms. Foucault argues that these social norms eventually lead to a “regime of truth” in which one’s conception of the world is shaped by dominant groups in a society.[2] On this point, it is important to note that “truths” as Foucault describes them are not limited to power dynamics, but rather “diffuse” into one’s personal life, in which authority figures may be absent.[3] Mill also alludes to the influence of power dynamics on institutions like schools.[4] In On Liberty, Mill suggests that one should question customs and whether or not they serve one’s interests. Here, he argues that one ought to ask “what would suit my character and disposition? Or what would […] enable [me] to grow and thrive.”[5] Contrary to Mill, Foucault does not directly propose a notion of autonomous personhood and both authors imply that one must critique social truths to become autonomous. With that, one can evaluate if these truths conflict with one’s own interests, and subsequently, whether one would like to participate in, or challenge social norms.
A regime of truth can obscure one’s idea of one’s own interests. Social “truths” reflect the prevailing norm about the objects or activities that one should find desirable (I will be referring to regimes of truth that are influenced by power dynamics as “Reflections”). For example, Eliza from Mary, A Fiction initially sought to marry “an officer [whom she danced with].”[6] However, Eliza’s father told her that “distinguished men” were more desirable to marry, leading her to marry a distinguished man instead.[7] Her father’s influence in her marriage demonstrates how Eliza’s conception of her own interests was influenced by a regime of truth taught by a dominant male figure. In this case, education not only molds her conception of desirable things, but also the means used to attain it. An example of these means is Eliza’s achievements, “interwoven in [Eliza’s] mind are achievements that she did not care for.”[8] Instead of being meaningful experiences, achievements were performed for the sole purpose of attracting a “desirable” husband.[9] In short, Wollstonecraft’s portrayal of Eliza points to the ways in which traditional education is problematic while also demonstrating that women in European society were “nothing but a shadow of a sound”; in other words, echoes of social teachings.[10]
The next two forms of echoes that Wollstonecraft aims to critique are found in education. The first form of echoes are words. In the same way that echoes reflect sounds, words reflect the objects or actions associated with an idea. While words can help convey complex ideas, they can only associate such ideas with tangible things. Therefore, when one learns from words, one only learns about objects and actions. For instance, Eliza, who symbolizes a traditionally educated woman, associates the abstract concept of “sophistication” with the action of “utter[ing] french expressions.”[11] As a result, Eliza is bound to the actions which society associates with sophistication, believing that she will become sophisticated if she performs such actions. On the other hand, Mary focuses on the authentic feeling of abstract concepts, like happiness. Instead of reasoning using words, she seeks to experience what happiness feels like.[12] In doing so, Mary understands the authentic idea of happiness which forms through her own lived experience. From this, she learns that actions do not mean happiness itself, but rather, are expressions of happiness. On a societal level, the contrast between Mary and Eliza’s approach to abstract ideas demonstrates the limitations of using words to teach others. Concerning an individual, however, it demonstrates that authentic ideas are necessary to understand the meaning behind one’s performative actions.
Situating the limitations presented by words in the regimes of truth proposed by Foucault helps us understand the extent of their problematic nature. Foucault posits that the actions and objects associated with concepts are determined by existing power dynamics. The European society that Wollstonecraft describes points to a patriarchal dynamic where gender roles are determined by men. In this society, women like Eliza are expected to show “maternal tenderness” and “love.”[13] Given her internalized ideas about the role of women, Eliza must “lisp out the prettiest of French expressions” while simultaneously demonstrating “maternal tenderness” to be seen as a sophisticated woman.[14] While Eliza is unaware of the process by which her desires are manipulated, readers are once again given a glimpse. Her conception of gender roles combined with the actions associated with sophistication lead Eliza to interpret her desires in a certain way. Instead of seeking to understand the idea of sophistication, Eliza instead seeks opportunities to carry out the actions associated with it. To put it simply, the role of words in regimes of truth determine the actions which Eliza associates with the abstract notion of sophistication and how it ought to be expressed. As a result, they shape her interpretations of actions which are desirable, actively seeking to perform them for validation from others.[15]
The second form of echo is imitation. Although it does not involve direct communication using words, it also obscures one’s interpretation of the world around them. Isolated on an island, Hayy learns not from words but by imitating the animals’ behaviour.[16] While Hayy can form authentic ideas and desires through his experiences, the avenues that he can use to pursue these ideas are limited to what he can observe. Although Mary also uses imitation, she goes a step further and incorporates authentic ideas into her actions. For example, while learning to write, Mary imitates Ann, and is initially limited by Ann’s method of writing.[17] However when she imparts her own ideas, the letter becomes a product of her “genius,” distinct from imitations of Ann.[18] Rather than adherence to the material taught to her, Mary decides what to write based on her authentic ideas. This enables her to choose between imitations of others or expressions of her own ideas, effectively giving Mary self authority. Mary’s transition from an imitator of Ann to an author of her own actions demonstrates that imitation of social norms limits the options that one can use to pursue one’s desires. In other words Representations of abstract notions through words determine the “truths” which inform one’s decisions. As a result, imitation limits the avenues through which one can actualize these choices. To summarize, the interplay between imitation and words demonstrates that Reflections manipulate both one’s desires and the methods used to achieve them.
CONDITIONS NECESSARY FOR SELF AUTHORITY
Given the limits presented by these Reflections, it becomes clear that two conditions are required for self authority and informed decision making. The first is the development of authentic ideas which enables one to adopt a perspective different from those presented by Reflections, and with that understanding the meaning behind actions. The second is an alternative perspective which presents options beyond those predetermined by society. It is these perspectives that allow one to choose between options and evaluate which option suits their best interests. When both conditions are satisfied, one gains self authority, which I will broadly define as: “the ability to make choices informed by one’s own understanding of one’s best interests and the means available to attain it.” Because of the limits inherent to traditional education, it becomes clear that a necessary step to fulfilling these conditions is self education.
Self education enables one to form authentic ideas from one’s experiences rather than adopting socially accepted forms of truth. Wollstonecraft implicitly points to this when discussing Eliza’s “soul.”[19] She states that Eliza has an “animal soul” which was formed by her desires to enter “polite circles.”[20] On the other hand, Mary’s soul appears to be rational.[21] The contrast between Mary and Eliza’s “souls” points to how self education fundamentally changes the ways in which Mary interprets the world. As a result, she positions herself as an outside observer of women who have “animal souls.”[22] According to Mill, the ability to observe and understand the impacts of social norms is key to gaining autonomy because it allows one to compare “modes of existence.”[23] In this argument, Mill refers to the idea that different “modes of existence” are suited for different people because they serve different interests. As such, gaining a broader view of different modes helps one determine which social norms help or hinder one’s goals. Contextualized by Mill, the comparison between Eliza and Mary’s souls reveal that the ability to evaluate social norms is rooted in the adoption of an outside perspective.
Now that we have established the importance of authentic ideas to self authority we need to examine its relationship with gaining alternative perspectives. A helpful example is Mary’s interaction with the physician. When both her father and friend became ill, Mary had to question the physician before he revealed the truth about her friend’s health.[24] It was only after Mary knew the truth that she was able to understand the implications of the physician’s words. By understanding all of the options available to her (choosing between her friend and her father) and their potential consequences, Mary is able to make informed decisions which suit her interests. Emerging from this are the social impacts of Mary’s informed decision making: a challenge to the widely accepted notion that women were emotional rather than rational.[25] By engaging in a conversation with the physician, Mary provides him with an alternate perspective, forcing him to choose between adherence to social norms (such as ignoring Mary) or revealing the truth.
After exploring how both of these conditions contribute to self authorization, it is now obvious that self education is crucial. Mill contends that decision making is also the key to being a human and the inability to choose consequently dehumanizes individuals. He reasons that decision making develops the “qualities which are the distinctive endowment of a human being.”[26] Because discourse plays a key role in decision making, internal (comparing authentic ideas to social norms) and external (alternative perspectives from others) forms of discourse are innate human experiences. This concept can be seen in the portrayal of Hayy in Hayy Ibn Yaqzan. In the story, readers only begin to relate to Hayy and understand him as “human” when he compares the idea of the Necessarily Existent to his observations of the animal hierarchy.[27] The internal discourse that Hayy develops throughout the story implies that the difference between man and animal is rooted in the ability to reason and make inferences from one’s environment. Each human subsequently uses such inferences to make informed choices about their own interests. By comparing rational man to animals, Mill demonstrates that one’s choices fundamentally change the self and that an autodidact possesses a distinctly human self. Further, it reinforces the significance of the aforementioned difference between Mary and Eliza’s souls. If we understand rational choice to be humanizing, this contrast symbolizes how the lack of choice deprives women of an inherently human experience. In short, the connection that Mill emphasizes between self authority and the human experience reveals the significance of self education in forming Wollstonecraft’s rational protagonist.
RELIGION: A CASE STUDY
The characters’ engagement with religion in both Hayy Ibn Yaqzan and Mary, A Fiction demonstrates the importance of internal and external discourse to satisfy the two criteria needed for self authorization. Their interactions with religions illuminates how prevailing truths such as the interpretation of religious practice shape one’s conception of the world. On Salaman’s island, education not only emphasizes the importance of religion, but dictates how citizens interpret the practices associated with it. For example, they were taught that religious devotion ought to be expressed through generosity and giving, yet failed to realize the meaning behind such behaviours.[28] This is because it was taught using words which only capture the literal expression of religion. Consequently, the practice of generosity became a Reflection imposed by religious leaders like Salaman. Further, the story’s setting on two isolated islands signifies that there were no alternative perspectives to traditional religious teachings, and as a result, led to conformity in their island society. This suggests the notion that one who conforms to regimes of truth and the customs associated with it will continue to do so if not given an alternative. In other words, examining the role of religion on Salaman’s island condenses our discussion of how regimes of truth impact both one’s desires and one’s means of achieving them. With that, it demonstrates how truths become ingrained in society and are left unchallenged.
Absal’s experience on the islands can be analysed as a symbol of the intersection between self education and traditional education. This intersection reveals how authentic ideas prompt critical evaluation of regimes of truth, ultimately resulting in a clearer interpretation of one’s world. Absal leaves Salaman’s island to deepen his connection to religion, seeking to go beyond the “outward practices” that Salaman performs.[29] His departure allows us to observe the process by which he begins to educate himself outside of traditional religious education. After leaving, he finds himself on Hayy’s island, given an alternative view, he becomes an outside observer of the regimes of truth on his own island. With that, Absal is able to compare his teachings from Salaman to new insights provided by Hayy, along with his authentic experience of religion.[30] By removing himself from traditional education, Absal has gained the two conditions necessary for self authorization. First, he gains an authentic experience of interacting with God. Secondly he gains an alternative perspective on the subject proposed by Hayy. Together, these conditions allow Absal to evaluate both notions of religion, allowing “reason and tradition [to become] one within him [with] all his religious puzzlings […] solved.”[31] Absal’s departure is a literal symbol of one’s escape from traditional education. Moreover, his experiences on Hayy’s Island and subsequent harmony between his two conceptions of religion demonstrate how self education can contextualize traditional learning. However, it also implies that members of dominant groups (such as religious leaders) are constrained by regimes of truth.
The example of religion helps us understand how regimes of truth impact members at all levels of society. However, before we discuss these impacts, we must specify the difference between autonomy and self authority. Considering that dominant groups (such as those represented by Absal) gain self authority by evaluating regimes of truth, it is clear that prevailing truths impact both dominant and marginalized groups. The universal impact of regimes of truth stem from uniformity in societal institutions like education in Mary, A Fiction, and religion in Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, both leaving little space for alternative thought. Accordingly, it neglects one of the criteria for self authorization: alternative perspectives and subsequently, one’s awareness of the options available to them. On the contrary, when alternative views are introduced, they not only impact an individual, but also social institutions. For example, Absal’s return with Hayy marks the introduction of alternative thought on Salaman’s isolated island. Upon arrival, Hayy taught the religious leaders ways to understand, through experience, the true meaning of religion.[32] Initially, readers are led to believe that these leaders rejected Hayy’s ideas and failed to learn. However, let’s say that the reader assumes that they learned from Hayy the same things that Absal did. We can then reason that like Absal, they have gained the two necessary conditions for self authorization. This leads us to the conclusion that although they choose to live under Salaman’s rule, they have gained self authority. In this sense, the religious leaders are able to evaluate whether or not participating in organized religion suits their own interests.
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The characters’ interactions with one another on both islands illustrate that self authority is not an escape from dominant groups. Rather, it is the ability to make informed decisions about one’s participation in such groups. Therefore, autonomy is not only the concern of the subjugated, but also of subjugators. Analysing this definition of autonomy through Mill’s reasoning raises questions about the relationship between individuals and society. Considering that regimes of truth impact all members of society, self authorization achieved by an individual can still be stifled by societal norms and institutions. For example, although Mary possesses both authentic ideas and alternative perspectives to make informed choices, the Ladies’ adherence to social customs hinder Mary’s ability to execute her choice.[33] Mary’s interaction with the Ladies suggest that while one can authorize one’s own actions, social hindrances can prevent these choices from coming into fruition. The widespread impact of regimes of truth prove that the ability to carry out choices autonomously requires wider societal changes.
The connection between actualizing one’s choice and social pressures helps us understand the relationship between Foucault and Mill’s theories in the context of Mary, A Fiction. At the beginning of his text Foucault states “Truth is a thing of this world.”[34] Here, Foucault means that regimes of truth are ingrained in society and therefore, one cannot exist outside of their influence. With this in mind, it is clear why Mary is unable to escape the prevalence of male authority in her life, such as those imposed by the Ladies. Even after gaining self authority and making informed choices, she is unable to fully actualize the choices that she makes. For instance, when writing a letter to her husband about her journey with Ann, Mary is compelled to represent the male physician’s view on the matter rather than her own.[35] Although Mary chose to represent the view of the physician, it may not have reflected the option that she wanted to choose. Instead, it may have been the one best suited to her interests within the constraints of social norms. The limitations imposed by society reveal that rather than a fixed state, autonomy is gained progressively and is exercised at different degrees. To address issues like those that Mary negotiates with, Mill suggests that greater autonomy can be achieved by modifying social institutions.
Mill argues that providing similar conditions to those needed for self authority support the realization of an individual’s full potential as an autonomous human being.[36] As long as choices must be informed to some extent by regimes of truth, a societal component to autonomy must always be present. Therefore, it is best if institutions that determine these regimes of truth consist of people who have gained self authority. By including people who provide authentic ideas and alternative perspectives rather than echoes of existing ones, genuine discourse can occur. Eventually, discourse leads to the critical evaluation of an institution, prompting members to consider whether or not an institution suits their interests. In doing so, they perform collective decision making and mold institutions to best suit the diverse interests by which they are governed. By embracing diversity rather than uniformity, institutions enable more people to actualize their choices and gain greater degrees of autonomy. Ultimately, individual autonomy is inseparable from power dynamics, in fact, the relationship between the two is reciprocal. By alluding to the social aspects of individual autonomy, Wollstonecraft implies that change not only requires one woman, but all members of society to pursue self education.
In essence, individual self authorization creates a domino effect both within the individual and in wider society. An analysis of religion on Salaman and Hayy’s islands demonstrates how the formation of authentic ideas and the subsequent introduction of alternative perspectives impact both individuals and the societies in which they live. In doing so it reveals a reciprocal relationship between individual self authority and collective autonomy. Rooted in self education, authentic ideas challenge regimes of truth, opening discourse both within oneself and with others. Emerging from this challenge is a greater diversity of perspectives which contribute to necessary positive conditions for the manifestation of one’s choices. Overall, Mary, A Fiction reveals that escaping echoes requires both individual self authority and the right societal conditions — it is only after these conditions are satisfied that people can exercise the judgement and choice inherent to human existence. To conclude, we must return to the beginning of Mary, A Fiction. In the advertisement, Wollstonecraft says “These chosen few, wish to speak for themselves, and not be an echo — even of the sweetest sounds […] the paradise they ramble in, must be of their own creat[ion].”[37] When viewed through the lens of Mill and Foucault, it becomes clear the “chosen few” are those like Absal and Mary who seek to understand the meaning behind social norms, destabilizing and questioning regimes of truth. Ultimately, it is the self authorization of these few that catalyses autonomy for all.
Endnotes
[1] Michel Foucault, “Truth and Power,” in Orientalism: A Reader, ed. A.L Macfie (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000), 42.
[2] Foucault, “Truth and Power,” 42.
[3] Foucault, “Truth and Power,” 42-43.
[4] John Mill, “On Liberty” In On Liberty and Other Essays, ed. John Gray (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 29.
[5] Mill, “On Liberty,” 68.
[6] Mary Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, in Mary, A Fiction and The Wrongs of Women, or Maria, ed. Michelle Faubert (Ontario: Broadview Press, 2012), 77.
[7] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 77.
[8] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 77.
[9] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 77.
[10] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 79.
[11] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 81.
[12] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 79.
[13] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 81.
[14] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 81.
[15] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 81.
[16] Ibn Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan: A Philosophical Tale, trans. Lenn Evan Goodman (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), 110.
[17] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 87.
[18] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 87.
[19] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 104.
[20] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 77.
[21] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 104.
[22] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 104.
[23] Mill, “On Liberty,” 64.
[24] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 99.
[25] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 99.
[26] Mill, “On Liberty,” 65.
[27] Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, 111.
[28] Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, 161.
[29] Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, 161.
[30] Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, 160-161.
[31] Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, 160.
[32] Tufayl, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan, 162-163.
[33] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 107.
[34] Foucault, “Truth and Power,” 42.
[35] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 100.
[36] Mill, “On Liberty,” 68.
[37] Wollstonecraft, Mary, A Fiction, 75.
Bibliography
Foucault, Michel. “Truth and Power” In Orientalism: A Reader, edited by A.L Macfie, 41-44. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474470476-010
Mill, John. “On Liberty.” In On Liberty and Other Essays, edited by John Gray 6-128. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Tufayl, Ibn. Hayy Ibn Yaqzan: A Philosophical Tale. Translated by Lenn Evan Goodman. Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 2008.
Wollstonecraft, Mary. “Mary, A Fiction.” In Mary, A Fiction and The Wrongs of Woman, or Maria, edited by Michelle Faubert, 77-148. Ontario: Broadview Press, 2012.