146 Gender and Space in Rural Britain, 1840–1920
Edward Said has viewed Victorian Britain’s relations with China as a West-
ern style of dominating, restructuring and having authority over the Orient.^3
Said’s theory rests on a complex hegemony of domination. His work focuses on
the discursive formation of the Orient as other and invests the colonial power
of the West both materially and culturally. In tune with Said’s approach, Lit-
tle instills Western values in Chinese women. She takes all things Western as
the measure of the universal, a stance which Said notes as being essential to
give ‘shape and meaning to the great Asiatic mystery’.^4 While recognizing Said’s
Orientalism, we also need to be aware of the limits inherent in this approach
when studying Victorian relations with China and to recognize that, in the late
nineteenth century, people in Britain possessed an overwhelming sense of their
own national identity. In literature on British identity, rural landscapes oft en
represent national identity; but the invention of British national identity was
never just imposed from the centre, nor can it be understood solely as the result
of colonization. By examining the concept of British rurality within the con-
text of Said’s theory of Orientalism we can shed light on the study of Victorian
relations with China.
British Identity and Rurality
Th e discursive formation of the rural also rests on a complex hegemony of
domination, but ‘relates to the context of their supposed transgression, that is, a
purifi ed countryside’.^5 Power frames an acceptance of marginalization and exclu-
sion of the other.^6 David Sibley provides a vision of idyllic rural life excluding
others who are ‘un-English’. He explains:
Th e dominant image of English countryside ... touches on questions of national iden-
tity. Th e countryside, as it is represented by those who have privileged place within it,
is the essence of Englishness, so those who are excluded from this purifi ed space are
also, in a sense, un-English. It is those parts of national territory that are pictured as
stable, culturally homogenous, historically unchanging which are taken to represent
nation in nationalistic discourse. Th ese are generally rural areas which stand in oppo-
sition to cosmopolitan cities.^7Said and Sibley presume that subject positioning within a racialized reality is
fi xed and undiff erentiated. Even so, Little manipulates colonial ideolog y and
seeks to frame nineteenth-century Englishness within colonial space and diff er-
ence. Th e colonial ideolog y of identity in the late nineteenth century provokes
the crisis of national identity and moral panic about race in Britain.^8 Once
located outside of England, Little experiences diffi culties in upholding her Eng-
lishness. Th e vision of the rural in China is far less ideal as opposed to her image
of rurality in her homeland. She constantly reminds herself that she is dwelling
in a space belonging to others which is not her home. However, her English-