In Volume IV, Clarissa’s self, identity, and agency become compromised by Lovelace’s intrusion and interception of the letters (which, of course, also ties closely to “Writing”). As Jessica noted in regard to Letter 207, “Clarissa used to write to Anna to forward her purpose of constructing an even better self. Now that Lovelace reads and analyzes their correspondence, we’re reminded that he has appropriated Clarissa’s project of self-discovery.” Throughout the volume as a whole, we are continuously reminded of Lovelace’s intrusion, as he constantly tries to steal or gain access to Clarissa’s letters, thus interfering with Clarissa’s own “self-discovery.” (See also Letter 175, Letter 176, Letter 198, and Letter 202.)
Furthermore, in this volume, Clarissa continues to struggle with achieving and understanding the “essential self” that she believes she possesses, but cannot quite attain. In Letter 200, for example, Steve and Debra both commented on Clarissa’s wavering and uncertainty as she attempts to discover her true self. Steve noted that “Thinking about an essential self which even she didn’t know is both very different and very close to thinking about identity as unstable. In other words, she posits an essential self, but admits that even she doesn’t know it fully.” In this letter, Clarissa notes that her self “misleads” her, and she must continue to waver between alternative paths in order to understand her essential self.
Lovelace undergoes shifts in his identity in this volume, as well. In the post titled Letter 209, Debra and Rachel referenced the Bakhtinian dialogic aspects that shed light on how Lovelace constructs his own identity through constructing his audience and dialogue with that audience. For instance, Debra wrote, “Lovelace constructs himself through a dialogue with the Belford he has also constructed. I think we really feel the rhetorical resonance of Lovelace’s writing. He is always in dialogue, either with himself or Clarissa or Belford or the Belford he has invented.” To that point, Rachel added, “This comes back to the issue of reputation for Lovelace, and, in his letters to Belford, he constantly references the others in the group of rakes: what they’re doing, what they think of this plan (indicating he’s been corresponding with them as well?), how they would or do react to him, casting them always in relation to Belford (whether through alignment or divergence).”