by Steen » Sun May 01, 2005 12:56 pm
I don't know to be sure. However I can see more evidense for saying "no" then "yes"
You can take the view that Keats views woman as objects. Not sexual objects, but almost goddesses. Every woman Keats dicribes is perfect. They are all beauitful, at least on the outside. Even Lamia, while being a ugly snake inside, takes the form of a beautiful and exotic woman whom Lycus cannot help loving. If you were being cynical then you could say that Keats' female characters are nothing more then male fantasy and are mearly objects of perfection that he worships in his own way, making a false god out of the female form.
However you cannot forget that Keats revamps the view of women in romantic litriture. Before Keats and others like Jane Austin, women were depicted as submisive and aloof. Keats dismissed the ideas of courtly love, the idea that a man should move heaven and earth of a woman and expect nothing in return.
The women in Keats work are stronger in will and less, well, pathetic!!! I mean I have never met anyone who would even think of being seen as a object or adoration it's so...cliche.
Lamia is a good example because she doesn't wait for Lycus to come and sweep her off her feet, she goes and seduces him, then keeps him to herself in her "purple-lined palace of sweet sin"
That kind of role-reversal would have shocked more then one person!
Don't forget, in a world where still in "housewife-childbearing" role they had little power. When Keats makes his woman as goddesses and muses he gives them a great power: Complete domiantion of the male characters hearts and minds.
You don't love a women because she is beatiful, she is beatiful because you love her.
