Shelley’s allusion to Sheridan’s tale puts into play several themes
dense with ideological significance. Nourjahad appears “happy” to
Winzy, most obviously, because the burden of his immortality was
eased by long periods of sleep and finally removed. Yet given
Winzy’s relationship to Bertha, Nourjahad would also be enviable
because he was finally reunited and married to his beloved
Mandana, “a young maid, so exquisitely charming and
accomplished, that he gave her the entire possession of his heart”
(Weber 1812:698), but was later deceived that she died in childbirth.
What distinguished Nourjahad’s relationship to Mandana was that
he chose her as his confidant—“longing to unbosom himself to one
on whose tenderness and fidelity he could rely, to her he disclosed
the marvellous story of his destiny” (ibid.)—thereby exemplifying
the eighteenth-century rise of companionate marriage, which
stressed domestic friendship, a sharing of affection and interests
between the spouses, while maintaining the husband’s authority
(Stone 1977). It was no doubt this antecedent of Shelley’s own
concept of egalitarian marriage, in addition to the fantastic premise
of immortality, that attracted her to Sheridan’s tale, especially since
it occurs within a narrative that can be read as a critique of
patriarchy. For The History of Nourjahad, like “The Mortal Immortal,”
questions a patriarchal gender image: Nourjahad represents male
physical superiority pushed to destructive extremes of violence
against women. Hence, when Winzy compares himself to
Nourjahad, Shelley’s text signals that it will address gender
differences and offers any reader of The Keepsake who could make the
comparison and shared Wollstonecraft’s thinking a feminist joke at
{180}
Winzy’s expense: the allusion inevitably points to the discrepancy
between his cringing weakness and Nourjahad’s potent excess,
beginning the satire of male power that is Shelley’s theme.
Yet whatever feminist design can be detected in Sheridan’s tale is
finally skewed by the racial and class ideologies that underwrite it.
In interrogating patriarchy, The History of Nourjahad is clearly
overdetermined by Orientalism: it simultaneously demonstrates and
rehabilitates the moral inferiority of the East. Nourjahad’s
characterization involves the racist procedure of naturalizing ethnic
stereotypes, grounding them in biology: “he was not of an active
temper,” “he was naturally choleric” (Weber 1812:698, 700). And
although Islam is treated reverentially, with Nourjahad receiving his
most severe punishment for blaspheming the Koran, Sheridan’s
valorization of marriage is linked to an explicit privileging of the
West and to a consistent representation of women as the object of
male sexual desire—even in the context of companionate marriage.
Thus, Mandana’s reciprocation of Nourjahad’s love is described as
“a felicity very rare among eastern husbands,” and she is revealed
to be Schemzeddin’s gift to his favorite, freed from her status as the
sultan’s “slave” because she participated in his “contrivance” by
impersonating Nourjahad’s guardian genius and later joining his
seraglio (ibid.:698, 719–720). Insofar as Schemzeddin is responsible
for Nourjahad’s reformation, moreover, the narrative affirms a
specific political institution, a despotic monarchy that relies on
paternalistic interventions. The ideological configuration of
Sheridan’s tale, what can be called an Orientalist image of
patriarchal despotism, jars against the bourgeois feminism that can
be read out of Shelley’s allusion, forcing Winzy’s exclamation to
precipitate still more contradictions in her project. “How happy was
the fabled Nourjahad”—that he lived under a despot who exercised
absolute power over his subjects? That he dominated his wife as well
as the women in his seraglio? That he was a Persian who overcame
his Oriental propensity to vice? These potential meanings would
have been accessible to readers of The Keepsake: the audience for
these expensive giftbooks was largely aristocratic and bourgeois
women, politically conservative, accustomed to prose and poetry
that was often Orientalist and filled with patriarchal constructions
of gender (Faxon 1973:xxi; Altick 1957:362–363).