Constructions of Femininity
Constructions of Femininity in Lou Andreas-Salome’s Fenitschka (1898)
Hailey Glassford
Abstract
This paper looks at Lou Andreas-Salomé’s novella Fenitschka (1898), and argues that the titular character expands social concepts of femininity in the face of expectations that women be submissive, uneducated, and unopinionated. The novella uses a male point of view to examine its female lead, describing her as more or less attractive to him depending on her level of submissiveness—a narrative technique that calls into question constructs of femininity.
Lou Andreas-Salomé was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, the sole daughter of an upper-class family (Heilmann, 139). Though the family lived in Russia, the language spoken around the home and the language Salomé uses to write her works is German. Education for women at the turn of the century was lacking. In 1913 only 4.3% of all students enrolled at college institutions across Germany were female (Lopez-Fanjul y Diez del Corral, 84). Salomé was one of the minority that attended higher education; she studied theology at the University of Zurich. Though Salomé didn’t gain the same acclaim as her male contemporaries and colleagues, like Freud, Rilke, or Nietzsche, she still produced an impressive body of work on various topics, including, but not limited to, philosophy and psychoanalysis. She is remembered most for her impact on the various men in her life, but Salomé also produced many works that questioned gender roles. For instance, in 1899 she published “Homo Sapiens as Woman”, a philosophical article arguing that women are something beyond their relation to other – romantic or professional. Just one-year prior, Fenitschka was published. Released in 1898 as a pair with Eine Ausschweifung, this novella utilizes a male point of view to examine its female lead and call into question constructs of femininity. The novella delves into what makes someone feminine as well as the fallibility in those definitions of the “feminine.” This essay will claim that the character of Fenitschka in Lou Andres-Salomé’s novella manages to expand the societal concept of femininity. In order to show this, I will discuss the constructs of femininity in society, and the driving forces that mould and reenforce femininity in familial settings and close relationships with regard to Fenitschka’s character, her decisions, interpretations, and behaviour.
The majority of factors that affect constructions of femininity are sociocultural in nature: stereotypes, obligations, and expectations put in place by society to tell a woman who she should be. Constructs of femininity include—but are not limited to—many gender stereotypes about women, as well as the expectations and obligations placed on females to conform to the traditional gender roles and norms. According to the Encyclopedia of Women and Gender, common stereotypical traits associated with women that fall into the realm of ‘what is femininity’ include the qualities of nurturing (674), sweetness (706), cooperativeness (810), modesty (1009), submissiveness (650, 703-706), sensitivity (654, 759), purity (1003), and warmth (759).
Before examining what constructs of femininity are present in Lou Andreas-Salomé’s Fenitschka, one must define femininity. According to the Oxford dictionary, femininity is the “qualities or attributes regarded as characteristic of women.” Similarly, the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines femininity as “the quality or nature of the female sex: the quality, state, or degree of being feminine or womanly.” Both definitions relate femininity back to women and their behaviour. The latter however implies a quantifiable scale in which one can measure the amount of femininity possessed. It cannot be said that Person A has a femininity rating of 59% but one could feasibly argue that person A is less/more feminine than person B. This idea raises the question of how one measures femininity, as well as what makes someone/something feminine? The obvious answer would be the person’s traits; if their behaviours and/or attitudes are more feminine then they have a quality of femininity, but then there is the question of what/who feminizes a behaviour or attitude.
One could argue that it is society that dictates what qualifies as femininity, and that it is society that promotes and perpetuates the various stereotypes associated with it. In 1891, the Reichstag voted against the admission of women to universities (Lopez-Fanjul y Diez del Corral, 84); women were not allowed to be educated as men were and therefore, intelligence and femininity were not considered to coincide. In Fenitschka, Max’s view of intellectual women and their attractiveness is representative of the various constructs of femininity placed upon women by society. He finds the combination of female and intellectual to be strange, going as far as to comment that the only expression he has never seen Fenia make is that of “a person who had earned a doctorate” (Andreas-Salomé 19). This reflects how deeply entrenched the various assumptions and expectations that society deems feminine are. It was unthinkable at the turn of the century that a woman could be “both educated and sexual” (Weedon, 63). Andreas-Salomé attended University in Zurich in the 1880s (Heilmann, 139). In her novella, Fenia receives her doctorate (Andreas-Salomé 13) and is an educated intellectual woman, which was not only practically unheard of but also frowned upon. Society went as far as to consider educated women in the 1890s “not quite feminine” (Weedon, 63).
The thought that educated, opinionated women were less than can be seen clearly in the familial setting as well. There is a single scene showing the relationship between Fenia and blood relatives. That one scene, though, paints a clear picture of the dynamics of the traditional family at the turn of the 19th century with respect to the treatment of and expectations placed on women. The brief scene with her uncle helps to highlight Fenia’s character and show her independence through the repeated defiance of “the controlling efforts of the men around her” (Whitinger, 465). Fenia was raised by her father as a free individual. Her uncle clearly did not approve, which becomes clear when he states that he “would never have wanted or permitted [it] for [his] own daughters” (Andreas-Salomé 23). Firstly, it is important to notice that he disagrees with women being raised freely—he would not have permitted it for his “daughters” — but he does not mention his sons. The emphasis placed on “daughters” suggests that Fenia’s upbringing was “masculine,” or at least what her uncle deemed as an upbringing unsuitable for females. Secondly, there is the use of the word “permitted” which reinforces the societal beliefs about a female’s place with the family and by extension society. The male of the family has the power and authority to make decisions on the female family members behalf, a power which is not enforced on the males of the family. The female family members are supposed to accept this authority and cooperate, they are to submit to the higher authority.
This expectation to submit extends into the realm of love, attraction and marriage as seen when Fenia and Max meet again in St. Petersburg. His attraction changes now that she is more submissive in posture, sitting in a relaxed manner with upturned palms (Andreas-Salomé 13). He remarks that she looks like a flower in full bloom, all “soft and gentle” (13). Max is more attracted to her in this state of softness, as evidenced later by his various comments on her “pale and withdrawn” visage being “very sweet” (13, 28). Max correlates expectations of femininity into his perception of attraction. Given the limitations of the narrative it is unclear as to Fenia’s perception of attraction with regard to various concepts of femininity. Her perception and opinions on love however are made perfectly clear.
Fenia defines romantic love in very “feminine” terms: she categorizes it as a tender force, supportive and sweet, full of passivity and purity. These are common descriptors used to explain things, people, and concepts that are “feminine.” To her, love equals peace. When discussing love with Max, she states that it is comparable to that which is “least demonic or romantic" (Andreas-Salomé 19). She goes on to describe it through simile, stating that love is, “like the daily bread which is blessed and stills our hunger” (19). She is comparing love to a basic need but not a necessity of life —it “still[s] our hunger” but does not “fix our hunger.” It is a soothing force, referring to the calming of stomach pains when one’s hunger has been sated. She further reiterates her opinion on love later when she comments that thanks to her lover she has “come to know peace” (36). The extent to which Fenia believes in her definition of love is debatable. Towards the end of the story, she comments on the outcome of her secret love affair, saying that she has woken from a dull mind after abandoning herself to love (36, 38). The way in which she describes love at this point is as though it were an ocean in which one could easily drown.
Max on the other hand views love not as a feeling per say but as action—like sharing. He asserts that “if [Irmgard] did not want… to share her whole life with [him], then it would not be real love” (Andreas-Salomé 40). He further mentions that “he puts love next to the other interests in his life and not above them,” thus not qualifying love to be more important than any other aspect of his life (42). Their definitions have contradicting factors but something they have in common is the belief that love is a refreshing force. Max states that he “became refreshed in [Irmgard’s] love,” and Fenia says that love is “like the stream of air which comes into our homes to refresh us” (42, 19) – both referring to love as a rejuvenating force and lending it various constructs of femininity like warmth, sweetness, and support (Encyclopedia of Women 759, 706).
Fenia’s view on marriage is—in terms of femininity and masculinity—the opposite of her view on love, where her opinions on love are rather feminine in nature, her marriage description is much more masculine. Her perception on marriage becomes clear when she receives a proposal from her lover that sends her into a panic because while love is peace, marriage is prison. Fenia considers the proposal and the thought of marrying in general to be “bad news” (Andreas-Salomé 38). Max is confused over her panic, since he considers marriage the logical next step to love rather than the conclusion. For Max “love leads to marriage,” but for Fenia “love and marriage are simply not the same thing” (40, 39). Fenia worked hard to gain the independence, professional opportunities, and responsibilities that men already enjoyed, and she believes—with good reason—that marriage will undo all her efforts (39). Afterall, in 1900, just two years after this novella was first published, the German civil code was enacted which further enshrined the right of the male in the family to be the sole decision maker (Lopez-Fanjul y Diez del Corral, 84). The husband makes the choices with regards to his wife’s education, occupation, and life in general. Fenia puts forth an intriguing question in the midst of this discussion. She turns the tables and asks if a man would want marriage if it would mean an end to his professional prospects, to his freedom and independence, if it would mean an end to the things that made him love life, would marriage still be his choice. The answer is not what is important here however, the important bit is the fact that a man would not have to make that choice in the first place.
Toward the end of their conversation on marriage, Max makes a comment suggesting that he understands how Fenia feels. Since she arranges her life “just as a man would,” it seems logical to him that she finds herself in predominantly male “situations, conflicts [and] temptations” (Andreas-Salomé 42). He also thinks, however, that she would suffer from these “situations, conflicts [and] temptations” more due to that fact that she is a woman and therefore more empathetic, more sensitive (Andreas-Salomé 42). To Max, the decision-making process is too much responsibility for delicate feminine sensibilities and so restrictions on women’s rights to decide education, love, marriage, and behaviour are a blessing since she does not have to suffer through male “situations, conflicts, [and] temptations.” It is not that she does not have to suffer them though; she does. The difference is that she does not get to choose how. She is supposed to submit and let the man choose for her, but she refuses to lose herself. She rejects the offer of marriage and maintains her independence.
If femininity is defined as the qualities, aspects, and degrees of womanliness as represented by women, then with Fenia endeavoring to emancipate herself and live independently in a world that is fighting her and will continue to fight her every step of the way, by choosing to defy convention and live in part outside of the socially accepted parameters of femininity, she is expanding the definition of femininity. Her decisions, actions, and qualities are at times not stereotypically feminine, but by making those decisions, doing those actions, and imbuing those qualities she is adding them to the construction of “femininity” because if women are the basis for the definition of femininity, then everything women do is feminine.
Works cited
Andreas-Salomé, Lou. Fenitschka. 1898.
“Femininity Definition & Meaning.” Merriam-Webster, 2022, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/femininity. Accessed 2022.
“Femininity Definition and Meaning.” Oxford Dictionary, 2022, https://www.oed.com/dictionary/femininity_n. Accessed 2022.
Heilmann, Ann. Feminist Forerunners: Womanism and Feminism in the Early Twentieth Century. Rivers Oram, 2003.
Lopez-Fanjul y Diez del Corral, Maria and Skulpturensammlung und das Museum für Byzantinische Kunst – Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, editors. Der Zweite Blick: Frauen. Heidelberg: arthistoricum.net-ART-Books, 2021. https://doi. org/10.11588/arthistoricum.956
Weedon, Chris. “Education and the Right to Work.” Gender, Feminism, & Fiction in Germany, 1840-1914. Peter Lang, New York, 2006, pp. 63–64.
Whitinger, Raileigh. Lou Andres-Salomé’s Fenitschka and the Tradition of the Bildungsroman, 1999, pp. 464–479, https://www.jstor.org/stable/30153820.
Worell, Judith. Encyclopedia of Women and Gender: Sex Similarities and Differences and the Impact of Society on Gender. Academic Press, 2001.
Hailey Glassford is an undergraduate student at Saint Mary’s University
Picture: “Lou Andreas-Salomé” by Hofatelier Elvira. Source: Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain.
