When you watch a period drama set in the nineteenth century, how often does a character stutter? Or have a speech impediment? Or not speak at all? In Dysfluent in Fiction: Vocal Disability & Nineteenth-Century Literature, Riley McGuire explores the “literary history of vocal disability in the nineteenth century” through romance novels, children’s literature, detective fiction, theatre, and life writing.
McGuire defines dysfluence as an “umbrella term to designate mores of communication that depart from normative expectations of pace, articulacy, and fluency, such as stammering, lisping, baby talk, and mutism” (p. 3). By embracing a broad definition, McGuire emphasizes the variety within dysfluent speech, as well as the different ways dysfluent speech could be experienced by speakers and audiences.
McGuire’s book makes three major interventions. Firstly, McGuire contends that dysfluent speech was prominent in nineteenth-century literature and served as “a dynamic plot engine, essential element of characterization, and fraught analogical device” (p. 3). Secondly, McGuire argues that examples of dysfluent speech in literature were not only derogatory or stigmatizing but could be “productive and pleasurable” (p. 7). Finally, McGuire maintains that the “relational nature of dysfluency made it an attractive aperture through which to shine light on other forms of nineteenth-century sociality,” particularly the ways individuals related to each other and to broader social institutions (p. 8). A guiding principle behind each of these arguments is McGuire’s engagement with the nineteenth-century premise: “‘who you are is how you speak’” (p. 18).
In the introduction, McGuire explains that the nineteenth century was a critical time for dysfluent speech, as technological developments including the phonograph and the telephone created increased pressure to codify and standardize oral communication (p. 12). Set against this backdrop, McGuire organizes his book into five chapters, each of which focuses on the representation of dysfluent speech in a specific literary genre.
Chapter one, “Lisping Lovers,” considers dysfluent speech in stories of courtship and analyzes the ways dysfluency and character could be mutually-reinforcing. McGuire argues that dysfluent speech, such as a lisp, was perceived a sign of youthfulness in girls, but needed to be trained out before a woman was of marriageable age. In some stories, a man taught a woman to lose her lisp, thereby training her to be an ideal wife. For male characters, however, dysfluent speech was an insurmountable barrier to marriage.
In chapter two, McGuire turns to dysfluent speech in Sylvie and Bruno by Charles Dodgson (Lewis Carroll). In this chapter, McGuire contends that atypical speech was permissible in children, with normative speech functioning as a sign of maturity. McGuire argues that “The novel thus uses Bruno to show that there are many forms of vocal expression, and though they each have affordances and limitations, they need not be hierarchized” (p. 95).
Chapter three highlights the role of a mute detective in Mary Elizabeth Braddon’s novel Three Times Dead. McGuire argues that Braddon’s book challenged the nineteenth-century stereotype of linking mutism and deafness by creating a mute character who could hear. McGuire also addresses the prevalence of “finger speak” in the novel, which allows the detective to communicate with a surprising number of characters (p. 111). In so doing, this chapter provides a compelling discussion of the ways dysfluent speech could be assimilated into nineteenth-century life.
Chapter four moves the reader from the page to the stage as McGuire analyzes the elderly Lord Dundreary’s famous stammer in Our American Cousin, the play President Abraham Lincoln attended the night of his assassination. This chapter explores the entertainment value of the lisp as a source of pleasure and laughter. However, by highlighting the fact that dysfluent speech is only entertaining in the character, rather than the actor, McGuire interrogates the boundaries of acceptability within dysfluent speech.
Finally, chapter five turns to the relationship between enslavement, race, and dysfluency. In this chapter, McGuire explains that nineteenth-century literature often framed dysfluent speech as a form of enslavement which could be cured through enlightenment. This chapter also analyzes fugitive slave advertisements to explore the ways dysfluent speech was used to identify enslaved peoples. However, as non-fiction sources, the decision to include fugitive slave advertisements may raise questions with some readers and somewhat disrupts the cohesion of the book’s argument.
One of the most compelling aspects of the book is the way McGuire seamlessly threads contemporary theories and ideas of dysfluent speech into his analysis of fiction. McGuire frequently references the theory of heredity, or the notion that dysfluent speech could be inherited from family members. In chapters one and two, McGuire also addresses nineteenth-century ideas that dysfluent speech was “contagious,” and could be spread through exposure and mimicry (pp. 38, 66). Additionally, McGuire discusses nineteenth-century methods for treating dysfluent speech, including speech therapy and tongue exercises. In his discussion of Charles Dodgson in chapter two, McGuire explains that writing provided an empowering “gateway to fluency” for Dodgson when other forms of therapy failed to curb his dysfluent speech (p. 73).
One subject which McGuire’s work does not touch on is the connection between dysfluent speech and madness. In some nineteenth-century court cases, dysfluent speech was viewed as evidence of possible “insanity.” Perhaps McGuire does not comment on this connection because it does not appear in the literature he analyzed. Nevertheless, this could have added a valuable dynamic to McGuire’s discussion of the way dysfluent speech was interpreted as a marker of inferiority in nineteenth-century society.
McGuire’s chapters are organized thematically and by literary genre. Throughout the book, however, McGuire addresses dysfluency in different stages of the lifecycle. Given the pervasiveness of this theme, it is intriguing that the book is not structured to follow dysfluent speech throughout the lifecycle: from endearing in children, to problematic in a professional career, to potentially debilitating in marriage, to amusing and eccentric in seniors. This is not necessarily a shortcoming, but it would have been a way to further explore the relationship between dysfluency and life stages.
Dysfluent in Speech effectively highlights the prevalence of dysfluent speech in nineteenth-century literature and the variety of roles it could fulfill. While often derogatory or used for entertainment, McGuire also emphasizes instances where dysfluent speech could be persuasive or empowering. Through his book, McGuire paints a complex picture of dysfluent speech in nineteenth-century society.
Works Cited
McGuire, Riley. Dysfluent in Fiction: Vocal Disability & Nineteenth-Century Literature. Ohio State University Press, 2025.
