The presence of patriarchy has always been the defining factor in restricting women’s potential and confining it to a restricted set of roles, particularly, those associated with nurturing and household chores. The specified perceptions were reflected in the literature representing the specified communities and time periods, of which “The song of Roland” and “The Arabian Nights” are an accurate example (“The song of Roland,” n.d.; “The thousand and one nights,” n.d.). Whereas in “The song of Roland,” women are portrayed as the foil for the male characters’ development, “The Arabian Nights” demonstrate women’s resilience and resourcefulness while being held in thrall of patriarchy.
Remarkably, the described situation repeats itself in “The Epic of Gilgamesh” and “Odyssey.” In “Odyssey,” the role of women is restricted either to the ones of docile and faithful wives or villains (Homer, n.d.). Similarly, in “The epic of Gilgamesh” (n.d.), even those female characters raised to the status of goddesses are restricted to nurturing roles, such as Shamhat, who represents a benevolent force fostering personal development in the protagonist. Therefore, even though women are represented as a variety of characters in the specified works, the range of their social roles is quite small. The identified limitations on women’s social opportunities could be seen as the direct effect of Islam and Christianity, which affected the epic narratives in question to a significant extent (). Since the range of women’s agency and social roles is minimized in both religions, both promoting the idea of women as mothers and nurturers, the respective religious principles could be seen as the effects of the restrictions on women’s social roles observed in all of the four narratives.
Unlike “The song of Roland,” where women are portrayed only briefly and mostly as docile housewives, “The Arabian Nights” depict women as smart and resilient, finding their way in a highly patriarchal environment. Therefore, while both narratives portray women in highly patriarchal settings, where their freedoms are severely curtailed, “The Arabian Nights” detail how women manage to survive in the specified context.
Virginia Woolf was a writer who showed her concern and disapproval with the fact that women are so poorly represented in history. As she mentions: “…looking about the bookshelves again, is that nothing is known about women before the eighteenth century. I have no model in my mind to turn about this way and that.” (Woolf 844) This shows the role that women played in a “man’s world”. Virginia Woolf states that every time she did a search on women, it either came up as an article about wife beating or about the lack of rights that women had. Men were the rulers of society and women were “slaves” who would be given into marriage without their consent and then suscept to an unfair and degrading treatment by their husbands. Every time a woman is mentioned, she is one of great fame and personal strength and only then it has been recorded. Otherwise, women as a class did not exist and their rights and freedoms were unheard of. Her displeasement can be compared to Martin Luther King’s fight for the rights of African-Americans. In the same way, history and societies have belittled and violated the equal living of both women and minority groups. Women had to face the challenge alone and quietly, doing anything they were told without any possibility of refusing or retaliating. They were forced down as a whole group and for a very long time, men dominated the world and societies. The same is true when Dr. King talks about the oppression that was going on towards his fellow African Americans. They were put down and had to face injustice and discrimination of the white man. Both Woolf and Dr. King use their power of mind and speech in order to make themselves heard. Virginia Woolf is said to have written in a “controlled and cool tone” this is because “she wrote with knowledge that most men were very conservative. In 1929, people would not read what she wrote if she became enraged on paper. They would turn the page and ignore her argument” (Woolf 839). This shown that she was very intelligent, talented and witty. When a person who does not want to be heard by other finds a way to be heard, it proves that this individual has great knowledge of themselves and the surrounding society, of people and their individuality, views and regulations that frame people’s minds. The same can be seen in Martin Luther King’s addresses to the nation, governments and societies. His speeches were filled with sense and facts; otherwise, he would not be heard or listened to. He uses strong evidence and support for his words, as can be seen in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (King 213). The struggle that Martin Luther King and Virginia Woolf led against the majority is one of intellect and faith. They do not use violent ways or angry and diminishing words. Their only weapon is reason and non-violent conflict resolution, which proved to be very effective. It is interesting to compare the views of Virginia Woolf and those of Stephen Jay Gould in his work “Nonmoral Nature.” Gould talks about the nature of animals and insects and how their cruelty cannot be seen as such, as it is only a product of natural order, of a force that is neutral to suffering (Gould 636). Here, the goal is not to hurt but to survive and continue the dominance of a certain specie or group. Virginia Woolf represents women who were put down for very long for no apparent reason. It creates a great contrast to the “Nonmoral Nature” because women’s abuse is done by people to other people. It seems impossible how one human being can act in such a violent and hurtful manner towards another one. And the fact that women are in such need of protection and care, sometimes more than anyone else, it is hard to imagine how this devastating treatment could go on for such a long time. The evil that men created and acted out towards women cannot be seen in any other light except in an immoral and dominant one. It was based on power and moral limits of the time and people that thought it was acceptable to treat their fellow human beings in such a way. This shows, once again, how ignorant, selfish and self-centered humanity can be, not an individual but a great number of people, whole societies that are well developed but at the same time lack the basic principles in a fair treatment of others.
Virginia Woolf is one of a few women who have made their point very obvious and effective. They have shown the world and societies that they should be ashamed of themselves. She proves that it is better to fight with intelligence and respect than weapons and harsh words. Her points make it clear that the way women were treated is not a part of nature’s great design; it is a part of human great flaw that must be eradicated.
Works Cited
Gould, Stephen. “Nonmoral Nature,” Further Reflections in Natural History. New York, United States: W. W. Norton, 1994. 32-44. Print.
King, Martin. “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” A World of Ideas. Ed. Jacobus, Lee. New York, United States: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2013. 211-231. Print.
Woolf, Virginia. A Room of One’s Own. Peterborough, Canada: Broadview Press, 2001. Print.
The “Aeneid” is one of the most prominent pieces of literature written by the ancient poet Virgil. The poem depicts a variety of different characters, each with their ambitions and inner struggles. The main hero, Aeneas, is driven out of his home after the destruction of Troy and travels the world in his quest to reach Italy. When discussing the “Aeneid”, the important role women play in the story can be noted. By realizing the role women play in the poem, one can gain an understanding of how the authors of old used supporting characters to shape their stories and protagonists. Women can be used for a variety of purposes in ancient literature: some of them are presented as seers and oracles, warriors and queens, loving wives and mothers.
In Virgil’s poem, however, the most prominent women are mainly introduced to advance the plot and enhance the character of Aeneas. Several female characters are present in the Aeneid that directly impacts Aeneas’s journey. They can influence Aeneas both positively and negatively, some of them helping the man, and others hindering his progress. The more obvious examples of this are Dido, Venus, and Juno. Aeneas’s mother serves as a positive force that tries to help the man on his journey, motivated by her love. Juno acts out of anger and spite, seeking to complicate the hero’s life, and Dido is compelled to advance the story by her affection for Aeneas. This paper will discuss the roles of these three women in the story and describe how they are used to push the narrative forward.
Dido
Queen Dido is relatable to the reader and her emotional and psychological struggles are undeniably human. As a character, she represents the values that are opposite of Aeneas’s. While the man is determined and steadfast in his goal to reach Italy, Dido places more emphasis on her desires and happiness. The queen of Carthage accepts Aeneas and his people into her city after their journey through the Mediterranean Sea comes to a halt. Dido grants favor to the man and welcome the wandering trojans by throwing a banquet. A recently widowed woman, she is still grieving the passing of her beloved Sychaeus. Through the orchestrations of Juno and Aeneas’s mother, Venus, the queen forgets about her dead husband and falls madly in love with the hero. They spend a night in a cave together, being unofficially wed there.
The woman puts her needs first, preoccupied with her feelings for Aeneas instead of focusing on expanding her land. Thinking that the man was in love with her, she assumed he would abandon his duty and stay at Carthage. Aeneas’s subsequent departure leaves the queen distraught and ashamed. With the love that clouded her vision gone, she feels remorse for not staying faithful to her late husband. Because of all the emotions, she feels about being abandoned, the woman commits suicide and curses the Trojans to be in eternal conflict with Carthage. Dido’s love is one of the temptations Aeneas has to overcome to reach his destination. The queen is used as a barrier, a challenge between Aeneas and his set goal. Her inclusion provides the story with higher stakes and tension, allowing the reader to feel like the main character has chosen out of his free will.
Venus
Venus, the mother of the main character and a goddess, is another female character that significantly influences Aeneas’s journey. While not being one of the main characters, she has an important role during several pivotal points of the poem. Venus safeguards Aeneas from danger and offers him helpful insights in time of need. Being a powerful deity, she uses her influence to help her son overcome various challenges and survive on his way to Italy. When Juno summons a storm on the sea to drown Aeneas and his men, Venus pleads with Neptune to quell the bad weather ensuring the safety of the hero’s crew. She, together with Juno is also responsible for making queen Dido fall in love with Aeneas. The goddess decided to work together to reach their individual goals: “whereby one woman’s trapped by the tricks of two gods” (Virgil, 83). Venus has also appeared before Aeneas and given him advice or led him away from danger. Her care for her son has severely lessened the impact of Juno’s interference on the man’s journey and allowed him to safely arrive at his destination. In regards to the “Aeneid” as a story, Juno’s inclusion is used as a way to resolve conflicts and explain how the hero can escape the more dangerous situations he finds himself in.
Juno
The last character that deserves a mention is the goddess of marriage, Juno. The goddess attempts to hinder Aeneas’s journey by presenting various obstacles on his path. Her spite for the Trojans comes from not being chosen as the most beautiful by Paris, and she channels her anger to compromise the well-being of Aeneas and his men. She intervenes with the domain of Neptune to stir up a violent storm on the sea, attempting to break the hero’s ships.
Juno is also involved in setting Aeneas up with queen Dido and inciting Trojan women to burn the ships at their stop in Sicily. The goddess is an agent of discord and utilizes various methods to stall or kill Aeneas. Juno herself realizes the futility of her efforts and the inevitability of the hero reaching Italy, which, however, does not stop her from trying to cause him as much trouble as possible (“The Aeneid. Quotes. Fate”). Her influence on the main character helps him grow stronger through overcoming adversity, shaping his character on the way. For the narrative itself, Juno is used as a source of conflict that allows the author to raise the stakes even when the outcome of the story is pre-determined.
Conclusion
Women fulfill a variety of roles in the story of “Aeneid”. Some of them aid Aeneas on his journey, others only exist to stand between the man and his goal. Venus, the protagonist’s mother, is a source of guidance and help for Aeneas, who is often faced with dangers outside of his control. She is used as a tool to resolve conflicts that are difficult to end otherwise. Dido, on the other hand, works in her interests in trying to convince Aeneas to stay with her. She works for the sake of her happiness and suffers from being deceived and abandoned. The woman is used to characterize Aeneas and make the reader doubt his devotion to his destiny. Lastly, Juno serves as the element of surprise, a person that does not seek to change the outcome but to influence the road to it in a major way. Knowing the limits of her abilities, she recognizes the fate of Aeneas as set in stone, nevertheless attempting to make his life worse. Her influence gives the hero several obstacles to overcome and gives the story its substance.
Works Cited
Virgil. The Aeneid.Translated by Anthony Kline, 2002. Web.
Society has set different norms that are supposed to govern how people live. Men and women have specific roles that they should adhere to fit in society. Failure to follow the criteria established for each function may result in being looked down upon and even discriminated against (Margaret, 2023). These roles are sometimes excessively severe and unfair; males are supposed to be the leader of their households and provide for their families, and they are usually allocated more onerous responsibilities. On the other hand, women are expected to stay at home and look after their homes, and they should not work or perform tasks that need more physical energy. They should not take leadership positions because politics seems too harsh and rough, and thus women cannot withstand such an environment, and they are also obliged to be humble to their men. This article examines how well male and female literary characters mirror the roles of men and women in the novel “Oryx and Crake.”
In this novel, Jimmy’s mother tells him to leave his dad alone because he is thinking and does not have time for him. She then hauls him with a wrist and leaves the house. This is because his done was thinking about work, and his mother could not allow him to disturb his dad because he was the one who worked to provide for his family. In that case, she has to pick up his son and move out of the house to give his husband peace of mind to do his job. This shows that men are the ones who provide for society, and they should not be distracted by children because that is not their obligation.
When Ramona, Jimmy’s dad’s lab technician, asks him how his wife is doing, he says that his wife is not hot, and that is a problem that makes him get worried. This shows that he does not care about anything else about his wife except that the wife has to look good. This shows that his dad expects his wife to look beautiful. In society, women are there to be seen and not to be heard; thus, he expects his wife to look good.
Jimmy’s dad says that Ramona was talking like a shower-gel babe in an advertisement, yet she was a technology genius and not stupid (Margaret, 2023). This shows that women can be judged by how they look or talk. Society expects people with tough jobs to talk or behave a certain way, especially women because no one cares about how men talk; they are perceived to be intelligent. In society, women who seem beautiful, like Ramona, are expected to do jobs that do not need much professionalism and seem easy.
When Jimmy asks his mother why she left her job, she tells him that she had to quit to stay with him (Margaret, 2023). Her mother answers him this as he looks at her husband, and this is evident that she did not quit because she was coerced. Her mother seemed to like her job, but she was supposed to stay home because she was married and had a child. In society, women should take care of their homes and not go to work because providing for the family is not their responsibility. Women are only obliged to stay at home.
This novel shows the societal norms that are set to govern how men and women perform their duties (Margaret, 2023). Some of these perceptions should be terminated because they limit the country’s economy’s success because women are not supposed to work, and also, women’s personal goals cannot be achieved because they should only attend to their children.
Reference
Margaret, A. (2023). Oryx and Crake: a novel. (Pdf download) Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood Free Download. Web.
Aristophanes play Lysistrata tells the story of a young woman who makes a difference in her community by convincing the other women to stand together to stop the Peloponnesian War. Lysistrata decides that if she can get the women together and have them all withhold sex until the men stop fighting, the war will end. To accomplish this, she first must get all the women of Athens to agree and then must convince the women of Sparta.
As an extra measure, the women take the Acropolis where the State Treasury is kept and hold it, as well as their own personal citadels, against the men until peace is declared. Although the play is intended to be a comedy, it seems Aristophanes intended to portray women in a stronger light than they were typically given credit for. This could be traced through his description of Lysistrata as a female leader, the way the women were successful in bringing about love rather than war and in the way that Aristophanes used the theme of weaving as a metaphor for the important job of women in society.
Lysistrata refuses to accept her role as a ‘mere’ woman, particularly as the war continues to drag on and the people at home are suffering from the lack of young men and attention to other important aspects of life. Throughout the play, Lysistrata continues to insist that women are just as smart and wise as men and therefore equally as capable of making necessary political decisions. Even the means by which she acquired her knowledge is similar to the way in which men gained their knowledge in this time period. “I am but a woman; but I have good common sense; Nature has endowed me with discriminating judgment, which I have yet further developed, thanks to the wise teachings of my father and the elders of the city.”
Like all the men and boys in her society, Lysistrata learned her knowledge in the most traditional way, by learning from the words of older men. To me, there is no difference between her form of education and what I know of Greek education for boys and her arguments, particularly as she lists them out against the men near the end of the play, are logical, coherent and irrefutable.
The women also show a great deal of strength as a combined force. Although several women are caught sneaking out of the Acropolis to return home, including one woman who hides a helmet under her clothing to pretend she is pregnant, the women as a whole manage to stand firm against the men who insist upon entering the temple. In attempting to control the politics of the situation, the women take on the role of the men and effectively put the men in their place.
The chorus of women makes their case to the citizens by first pointing out how women were important idealized elements of society through their childhood and coming to the reasonable conclusion that their advice is necessary. “I have useful counsel to give our city, which deserves it well at my hands for the brilliant distinctions it has lavished on my girlhood … So surely I am bound to give my best advice to Athens.
What matters that I was born a woman, if I can cure your misfortunes? I pay my share of tolls and taxes, by giving men to the State. But you, you miserable greybeards, you contribute nothing to the public charges; on the contrary, you have wasted the treasure of our forefathers, as it was called, the treasure amassed in the days of the Persian Wars.” In talking the old men down, they prove their own strength and they begin to adopt the same means of argument that the men typically employed within the senate.
For me, the best metaphor for the play is the concept of weaving. The whole idea that women are better at sorting out the complicated messes of society because of the practice they get in unraveling the tangled skeins of yarn in the process of weaving is fascinating. I love the way Lysistrata combines the two activities in a point by point comparison. “First we wash the yarn to separate the grease and filth; do the same with all bad citizens, sort them out and drive them forth with rods – they’re the refuse of the city.
Then for all such as come crowding up in search of employments and offices, we must card them thoroughly; then, to bring them all to the same standard, pitch them pell-mell into the same basket, resident aliens or no, allies, debtors to the State, all mixed up together. Then as for our Colonies, you must think of them as so many isolated hanks; find the ends of the separate threads, draw them to a centre here, wind them into one, make one great hank of the lot, out of which the public can weave itself a good, stout tunic.” The similarities between weaving and politics as described by Lysistrata are undeniable.
As I think about it, it seems that Aristophanes was suggesting that women had a particular strength that went well beyond what men usually gave them credit for, but also that the solution to the wars being experienced at the time he wrote the play were very simple. He does this first by indicating that the solution to the war would be something as simple as withholding sex from the men, the idea that is brought forward by Lysistrata.
His second proof is that the women are able to out-argue the men using logical progression and reasoned debate, not something they were considered strong in and therefore must be winning only based upon the strength of their proofs rather than their skill. Finally, he relates the solution to the war to be something as basic and prevalent as weaving, something that was done in every household throughout the Greek nations.
Works Cited
Aristophanes. Lysistrata. Jeffrey Henderson (Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Over the past several decades, gender relations have been a central topic for social scientists. This essay argues that the evolution of the social role of women that took place from the Anglo-Saxon period to the Early Modern period was slow and lacked significant changes, as the patriarchal structure remained unshaken.
Two renowned works Beowulf and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (from The Old English and Middle English periods respectively) demonstrate the ability of females to break social norms and challenge a deep patriarchal social structure. Ghani pointed out that the women who exhibited masculine qualities in those two periods in history were associated with villains and monsters (61). The author described how Grendel’s mother and Morgan the Fay challenge the existing rules of the time they lived: “The image of Grendel’s mother reflects a threat to the homosocial bond between men that regulates a patriarchal system. On the other hand, Morgan the Fay is projected as a challenge to Medieval knighthood…” (62).
The social perception of gender roles stayed unchanged even in Shakespeare’s time. The reign of Elizabeth was based on a patriarchal system with highly unequal power relations between the genders (Levis). Women were regarded as weaker and less emotionally stable sex. And once again, Shakespeare masterfully represents the socially unequal society by depicting a woman named Viola, who lacked ‘normal’ feminine behavior. She possessed certain masculine features, such as skillfulness, practicality, and resourcefulness. She was the one who used reason to mitigate an emotional quarrel between Orsino and Olivia (Lewis).
All in all, the evolution of the female gender from the Anglo-Saxon to the Early Modern period was slight. However, during all three periods, the three works managed to illustrate an alternative reality by presenting female characters with developed masculine qualities.
Works Cited
Ghani, Hana. “The Feminine Other: Monsters and Magic in Beowulf and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” J-Lalite: Journal of English Studies, vol. 2. no.1, 2021, pp. 55-63.
Lewis, Hannah. Gender Roles Reviewed Through Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night with 21st Century Applications. 2021. Olivet Nazarene University. Honors Scholarship Project.
Published in a 1978 issue of the New Yorker, “Girl” by Jamaica Kincaid is an example of communication between a mother and her daughter, where she lays down the expectations that society has of her as a woman. The story illustrates stereotypical and patriarchal societal norms, which lead the mother to pass on apparent feminine traits or cultures that their society expects girls to know and follow.
For instance, the mother explains to her daughter the importance of cooking, cleaning, and entertaining. She also mentions severally the importance of not being perceived as a slut. She concludes the story by asking her daughter, “Are you really going to be the kind of woman that the baker won’t let near the bread?” (Kincaid, 1978) in a further illustration of the stereotypical gender roles dictated in their society. Kincaid’s short story demonstrates how society enforces and perpetuates stereotypical societal roles for women by dictating what is expected of them.
The Implied Value of Domestic Knowledge
In the story, the mother is assured that passing on valuable domestic knowledge to her daughter will save her from a life of ruin and promiscuity and empower her to be a productive member of society. For example, she gives her daughter instructions on washing clothes, sweeping, cooking pumpkin fritters, buying bread, and growing okra (Kincaid, 1978). Undoubtedly for many patriarchal societies, domestic knowledge prompts a woman’s usefulness and productivity, which wins respect from society and their family. In the context of the short story, household work seemingly results in women’s distinction and power as well as keeping them occupied and away from “temptation.”
It is discernable from the reading that the mother has immense reverence for the power of domestic knowledge due to the various explicit guidelines she offers her daughter. As far as the mother is concerned, good domestic knowledge results in respectability and decency. With this in mind, a simple act, such as sewing up a dress, subsequently becomes more than just a maintenance act as it can save a woman’s sexual reputation in society.
Societal Expectations Concerning Women’s Conduct
The entire story is an example of how women are expected to be careful of everything they do. In the most basic definition, ‘Girl’ is a set of rules for a young girl growing into a woman. These rules outline what she can and cannot do as a woman within society. One clear example is when her mother tells her, “this is how to behave in the presence of men who don’t know you very well” (Kincaid, 1978).
Most of the rules are given to her to know how to act to avoid being perceived negatively. The mother tells her daughter all of the things she needs to know to be noticed as a perfect woman. These instructions make the daughter feel like anything she does must be perfect, which undoubtedly puts undue pressure on her. With this regard, the story portrays the pressures women in society must deal with and how young girls have unrealistic pressures to be perfect individuals. Such pressure is unhealthy as it may result in anxieties, depression, and feelings of low esteem in women who cannot live up to these standards.
Women’s Sexuality: Expected Norms, Behaviors, and Responses
In many societies, women often risk being called derogatory terms based on what they wear and their participation or exploration of their sexuality. “Girl” shows how this is true based on the things the mother tells her daughter. For example, the mother instructs, “try to walk like a lady and not like the slut I know you are so bent on becoming” (Kincaid, 1978). She also tells her daughter, “this is how you hem a dress when you see the hem coming down and so to prevent yourself from looking like the slut I know you are so bent on becoming” (Kincaid, 1978). The mother says to her daughter, “this is how to behave in the presence of men who don’t know you very well, and this way they won’t recognize the slut I have warned you against becoming” (Kincaid, 1978).
The girl’s mother repeatedly refers to her daughter as someone with the potential of having more than one sexual partner, that is, a “slut”. This example shows the extent of “slut-shaming” that goes on within their society and culture. This perspective implies that men can have sex with as many people as they want to, but if a girl does the same or dresses in the ‘wrong’ way, they will be ridiculed and called names. Along the same line, the mother instructs her daughter to be careful of how she looks and does in public for fear of being seen as less than she is.
Conclusion
‘Girl’ is a short story that demonstrates and illustrates how stereotypical and patriarchal societal norms are perpetuated and enforced. Authored as a conversation between a mother and her daughter, the story shows the various lessons and cultures society expects girls to know and follow for their validation. In the story’s illustrations, domesticity shows how societal norms are propagated by implying that the knowledge of domestic work and culture prompts a woman’s usefulness and productivity. This apparent usefulness results in a woman’s validation by gaining respect from society and their family. However, the propagation and enforcement of these norms is unhealthy. It may result in anxieties, depression, and feelings of low esteem in women who cannot live up to these standards.
Women throughout history have oftentimes been regarded as the inferior sex. They have been through slavery, neglect, ridicule, persecution, deprivation, and all sorts of degrading acts. Ages ago and in distant and varied cultures, newly born girls were instantly killed. They were thought of as bad luck or as useless to society. Women didn’t have equal rights with men for a very long time. They were not afforded education because it is only the men who should learn and women should serve their husbands. Women’s roles were limited to being a wife, mother, daughter, housekeeper, and nothing else. Are all these maltreatments a form of gratitude for how women took care of children and their needs at home? Grave as it is, this bad treatment of women lasted for as long as we can remember, and it took a series of struggles for women to gain the rights they deserve. In contemporary society, women are now treated differently. There is greater respect for women, and opportunities open to them are abundant. Women now are independent, and they occupy seats of power, may it be in government, civil society, or the corporate world. Though it is also a reality that there are still cultures or groups in different parts of the world where women are regarded as the lesser gender, how society treats women now is far better than in the 18th or 19th Century.
The story of The Last of the Mohicans was set in the mid-1700s. The story specifically happened in 1757. We shall focus on the two main woman characters in the novel for the purposes of this paper. The two women in the story were Cora and Alice. Both have different personalities, but nevertheless, both portray the status and role of women in those times. Cora is the older of the two sisters. She was of mixed racial heritage, different from her half-sister Alice. Her mother is a descendant of West Indie slaves, and her father is Scottish. She was brave, though her courage was restrained because women were deemed weak, soft, and unable to protect themselves in those times. She was protective of her half-sister Alice. Her affection and caring for her sister were likened to that of a mother to her child. She was always willing to sacrifice for her sister’s sake, to the point verging on martyrdom. Whenever Alice would seem fearful, Cora will immediately come to her side and abate those fears. She was also very forgiving. Alice, on the other hand, was very helpless. She showed no traces of independence. She was greatly dependent on her sister. She faints when she is stressed and does not speak for herself. She speaks only when responding to someone speaking to her. Women during the mid-1700s were treated as damsels in distress with no capability whatsoever of standing on their own or of defending or protecting themselves. In the novel, however, there were instances when Cora subtly used her femininity or sexuality as a factor in getting what she wanted. There were times when the desires of the men were highlighted. This somehow reflects the treatment of women as sex objects or objects of desire.
The major theme of the novel is the spirit of heroism in men. The issue of color prejudice was likewise tackled. This is another discourse at hand which we will not dwell upon here. The issue of prejudice against color and of mixed races is also very dominant in the film. We will, however, only focus on the issue of how women were treated in the novel. The main characters were men, and the plot revolves around saving women who were kidnapped. In the course of the effort to save the women, battles were fought, and relationships were formed and destroyed. In the novel, women were used as a means to make the men more interesting. They were treated as objects fought upon and desired by men. They were regarded as one of the reasons for battle and, at the same, a reward once a battle has been won.
The role of women from the 1700s to the mid-1800s have generally remained the same; they took care of the household. They had no opinion and voice in society. They were considered soft, unassuming, and very forgiving. They were submissive to their fathers and husbands. If they are given a chance to speak up, then it is just a matter of familial courtesy but is not taken seriously. They were definitely not treated as being equal to men. They were only subordinates. They were regarded as being lower in status and role in society. They are not allowed to own any property once married, and they could not get a divorce. They were mere reflections of the successes or failures of men. It was then a very patriarchal society.
As time progressed and situations changed, the treatment and status of women likewise changed. People learned to view women and their importance in society in a different and more positive way. This did not, however, happen in an instant; the battle was long and arduous. From the industrial revolution to World War I and II, women have taken on roles and jobs usually filled by men, but after the war, women again return to their roles at home and their low-paying jobs. Major steps were taken to advance the cause of women, like The Civil Rights act of 1964, which prohibited discrimination against gender, race, or religion, and the Equal Pay Act of 1964 (United States).
Today, women are empowered. They have the options and the means to pursue endeavors without gender barriers. Women have gained their rightful place in society and in the fields of politics, education, and the economy. Though we see the government still being dominated by men, the arena is open to women. Politics is generally accepted as a chauvinist field, but there are women who take this as a challenge and do not see this notion as a hindrance to their goals. To this date, there are women holding key positions in the government, and many other women are exercising their political rights by voting, a right which they acquired in 1920. The judicial courts also comprise women judges, and we see countless women lawyers who are active in their chosen fields of law. Law enforcement is now not limited to men only. There is an increasing number of female police officers in the system, and still, a growing number interested to join the police force. Gone were the days when women are supposed to be meek and afraid. Women now are not afraid to show their strength and ferocity, but at the same time, they are also handling maternal roles at home, which require tenderness. This is the flexibility of a woman.
Corporations and big businesses still see a huge bulk of top management comprising men. Women are very visible in the workplace, but they occupy the lower positions. It is usually the men who hold the top positions or those positions which require making major decisions. There are women power figures in top corporations, but they are only a handful. The economic ground is much like the political field where the chauvinist thinking that men are the stronger sex still exists. This chauvinist thinking, while it is a major disadvantage to women, could also serve as a motivator for other women to strive harder in achieving their goals. Women in the workplace, by their sheer number, regardless of their positions, have a power that they can utilize to advance and safeguard their rights.
In the field of education, women are now able to pursue their learning endeavors in every which way they like. From all the choices of learning institutions and means, women can choose where and how they like to learn. Schools are prohibited from discriminating against gender when admitting students. This right to education will enable them to gain competence comparable to that of a man in engaging in endeavors previously only regarded as a man’s field.
The major difference between the treatment of women then and now is the concept of choice. The rights equal to that of men are now afforded to women and thus give them the opportunity to decide which path they wish to tread upon. There are now no barriers but only options to choose from.
Work Cited
“United States.” Women’s Rights: A Journey Around the World. 2007
The images of women and their ideal role as portrayed in Mrs. Beeton’s Book of Household Management, and in Godey’s Lady’s Book share many important characteristics, but reveal subtle differences which reflect the gap between the British Empire and its wayward ex-colony. In neither country were women accorded the rights which we, today, take for granted. In neither country did this lack of rights translate into being exempt from the heaviest of labor inside the household. However, there are discernable differences, inferable from both publications, in the role of the wife and mother in the creation and growth of the nation.
In the middle of the 19th century, women on both sides of the Atlantic had many decades to go before obtaining the right of suffrage. Instead, the role of the mother of the nation was widely discussed as the aim and goal of American women. In this model of women’s place in society, mothers were to raise all their children to be model civic participants and support their spouse’s civic and economic achievement. An obvious weakness of this sop thrown to the bright and energetic women of the Federal period was that it marginalized, even more than they already were, women who could not or would not marry or have children. Additionally, this task was rather small beer for women who had lived and worked and made personal sacrifices through the heady days of the fight for independence, or who had seen and heard of their mothers doing so, or read about these exploits in articles such as Heroic Women Of The Revolution: Jane Gaston in Godey’s Lady’s Book (Ellet). However, this encouragement for the civic preparation and therefore the education of all the children ( even if the girls were only to be taught in dame’s schools or in the off-season when haying and harvesting left the one-room schoolhouses empty of boys), was not without long term results. The early funding of public schools, colleges, and libraries, and the impetus for universal literacy probably owes much of its energy to this pressure for mothers to not only bear and rear, but also train, the future citizens well (Ellet).
However, this heavy responsibility for the future health of the Republic was laid upon women’s frail shoulders in the context of the fair sex being entirely subordinate legally to their husbands, unable to hold property in their own name, enter into contracts, go to court, pursue higher education alongside men, or enter professions. This did not pass unremarked, as is apparent from the excerpt from Goethe (Goethe). As discomfort with the issue of slavery and other inequities drew women into the arena of advocacy, the irony of campaigning for the rights of others while their own rights were still a dream became more pointed. However, the popular press was not necessarily the venue where such concerns were routinely hashed over.
The March 1850 issue of Godey’s Lady’s Book appeared in the same half-decade as very public initiatives on behalf of women’s suffrage and rights. Not one hint of this ferment is visible explicitly in the articles. In fact, the tone of the excerpt from Goethe translated as “The Sphere of Woman” (Goethe), is dismissive of all objections to the status quo. On the contrary, the “prudent woman”, according to Goethe, “reigns in her family circle, making happiness and every virtue possible, and spreading harmony and peace throughout her domain.” As contrasted with the world outside the home, where the husband may not be able to realistically accomplish what he wishes, with a prudent wife running his household as he desires and she achieves, he is “a happy prince over that happiest domain”. Goethe goes on to assert, regarding the householder thereby freed from concern about his household, ”Thus, in a spirit of true independence, he can devote his energies to great objects – and become to the state (by promoting its prosperity) what his wife is to the household over which she presides.” (Goethe) It is tempting to speculate whether this essay in the original German is quite so neatly congruent with the aims of the young Republic, or whether the translator has subtly shaped the English text to fit the perceived needs of the newly independent and newly self-governing America.
A piece of historical fiction in Godey’s, the story of Katherine Walton, shows a heroine who is gracious even to her enemies, who describe her thus; “By my life,” said Cruden, “the girl carries herself like a queen. She knows how to behave, certainly. She knows what is expected of her.” In fact, the likelihood that all the valuables have been spirited away to hiding and safekeeping passes unobserved because, says one of her British visitors, ”everything was so neatly arranged and so appropriate, that I could fancy no deficiencies.” (Simms)
However, the men observing her express their hope that “as in that of all other unmarried young women, that she may soon find her proper sovereign.” The smitten Balfour says of her, “She is a queen…I only wish that she were mine. It would make me feel like a prince, indeed. I should get myself crowned” (Simms)
As it transpires, Katherine is indeed the intended queen of one of them, a fellow passing as a Loyalist, She chides him, in fine Revolutionary fashion, when they have a moment alone. She upbraids him for endangering himself and the cause, as follows: “I know that you are not the person, at a season when your services are so necessary to the country, to bestow any time even upon your best affections, which might better be employed elsewhere. Surely, there is a cause which brings you into the snares of our enemies, of a nature to justify this rashness.” (Simms)
It is clear that her lover, Singleton, is fully aware of her personal strength and ardor for liberty because he draws attention to the change in her.
” ‘You have become strangely timid and apprehensive, Kate, all of a sudden. Once you would have welcomed any peril, for yourself as well as me, which promised glorious results in war or stratagem. Now.’
‘Alas! Robert, the last few days have served to show me that I am but a woman. The danger from which you saved my father brought out all my weakness. I believe that I have great and unusual strength from (sic) one of my sex; but I feel a shrinking at the heart, now, that satisfies me how idly before were all my sense and appreciation of the great perils to which our people are exposed’.” (Simms)
And indeed, later in the story, when the British threaten, Singleton places her safely behind himself (Simms passim). This Katherine Walton is a prime romance novel heroine of her age; brave on behalf of the nation, but a shrinking blossom when her family’s safety is in danger, and there is an appropriate male to protect her. Of course, she is also always a lovely hostess and good manager of the household, even concealing by her neatness and artful table arrangements her sequestering of the family’s silverware (Simms passim).
Another article that highlights the ideal of American womanhood is the aforementioned story of Jane Gaston in the Revolution. The incidents that she and other women endured are as distressing as anything seen today on the news. The spirit and defiance of these colonial ladies are remarkable. The clue to what readers were to take away from the tales of these resourceful women (imagine the challenge of making a meal from the sweepings from the floor), is as follows; the “expectancy of the State is of those who are descended from the patriots whose lives have been devoted to the service of their country”. Even while recounting stories that clearly prove that women can be as tough and capable as men when motivated, Godey’s message is that they are meant to be the bearers (literally) of the seed for the future of the country (Ellet passim).
In England in 1850, conditions for women were not noticeably better. Women were subject to the same absence of rights and access to suffrage, education, professions, property holding, legal identity and action, divorce, and such, which afflicted their American sisters. In fact, since American law was based on English common law, these American deficiencies were attributable to the historical place of women in Britain for the previous several centuries.
English law regarding women reflected the long-standing negative attitudes of the Catholic Church towards women as the source of evil in the world, even though England had been independent of Rome for over a hundred years. Additionally, English women were subject to the additional burden of a far more rigid class structure, which limited the economic and social mobility of both sexes. There was also the issue of the established church; for those in the British Empire who were not members of the Church of England, many educational and employment opportunities were effectively closed off. Further, there was the question of ethnicity to contend with. The English were famously contemptuous of the Scots, the Welsh, the Irish, and, unfortunately, the dark-skinned peoples of their far-flung Empire. If you were a woman whose religion, race/ethnicity, or class, was not English, Anglican, and gentry, you were really at the bottom of the pile. Finally, once Queen Victoria took the throne, her personal idiosyncrasies stamped their imprint on the styles and fashions of the era, and these were not generally conducive to female independence.
In this context, Mrs.Beeton’s Book of Household Management both empowers the mistress of the household realm and reaffirms the rigidity of the existing order. It is clear that Mrs. Beeton believed that women were in charge of a complex and serious enterprise, and one which had implications outside her home, in managing the household economy. But there is much in Mrs. Beeton’s which oppresses. There are repeated apprehensive references to the careful choice of friends and acquaintances, suggesting that “those who possess a long experience of the world, scrutinize the conduct and disposition of people before they trust themselves to the first fair appearances.” (Sic). The section on friendships paints a picture of isolation that is almost painful for a modern reader. The lady of 1850 was obligated to choose her associations on the basis of their being prepared to “reprehend vice” and “defend virtue”. It is instantly understandable the wisdom of Beeton’s directive that “A gossiping acquaintance who indulges in the scandal and ridicule of her neighbors should be avoided as a pestilence”, just as one would avoid someone who practices “fair-faced deceit”. This all sounds very modern in tone. However, forming a friendship of “a kind as well tend to the natural interchange of general and interesting information” sounds a bit bland and empty (Beeton 301). With such an agenda, friendship sounds like a rather sterile and duty-bound business. One wonders if the 1850’s wife and mother had, perhaps, vanishingly few outlets for ventilating her frustrations save her diary. While the specific Godey’s Lady’s Book articles examined here do not address this particular issue, it is intriguing to wonder whether Americans would have developed their famous openness, had they also been so heavy-handedly scolded by their editorial authorities against carelessly forming acquaintances and sharing confidences.
There is also an assumption expressed in this section on “the Mistress” that the household will include domestic servants, which many might regard as enabling the continued oppression of the less privileged classes. These people in her employ are acknowledged as being human at all mainly in the recognition that they are subject to self-indulgence in the same way their employers are. Otherwise, they are “domestics” or “servants” (Beeton 300).
The mistress is the model for the behavior of her staff (and other residents of her household). She is ideally “modest”, “prudent”, and “careful” (Beeton 300). She rises early, avoids “self-indulgence”, behaves thriftily, takes cold or “tepid” baths daily, and ensures that the whole household does likewise (Beeton 300) (a practice which most modern women and men would abjure with shivering loathing, but which must have represented an improvement over the virtual absence of bathing in earlier periods). Our model housewife seeks out constructive recreation and edifying society who may be entertained with “reality and truthfulness” and with “genuine hospitality” (Beeton 301).
Mrs. Beeton also makes some judgmental statements, even in this short passage, which reveal a prevailing hypocrisy of the era. Beeton includes a quote linking frugality to temperance, prudence and liberty, and implying that extravagance leads to poverty (Beeton 300). While this observation may be accurate in many cases, this quote from the (male) epigrammatic authority, Samuel Johnson, blithely ignores the important role of uncontrolled fecundity in impoverishing families and trapping them in poverty. In 1850 there was no legal way to control family size effectively and definitively, and the untrammeled rights of a husband to his wife’s person made voluntary conception control a rather hopeless enterprise. Women of all classes were at the mercy of their innate fertility and the whims of their husbands in any effort to plan conceptions. Although the next several decades would see increasing pressure to change this, it was not until living memory that true conception control became legal and available.
Mrs.Beeton’s opening encomium to the role of the prudent wife parallels that by Goethe, in the article previously cited from Godey’s (Goethe). This introductory section is capped by a lyrical verse from the Biblical book of Proverbs1. Beeton’s text makes the wife and mother out to be the angel of the household. Regarding her husband and children, she “reclaims the one from vice and trains up the other to virtue”. She is responsible for keeping her husband from doing the unspeakable, literally holding him back from degradation, and saving him from a soul’s disaster (Beeton 300). Note how this differs from the slightly different aim, expressed in the Goethe essay in Godey’s (Goethe), of freeing the husband for concentration on civic accomplishment.
Note also that the issue of children is covered in a section titled as the “Management of Children” (Beeton 300). Is this rather chilly choice of words by chance? Clearly, for Mrs. Beeton, child-rearing was yet another opportunity to demonstrate good supervision. Enjoying it was a very different question.
Beeton supports the mother’s responsibility to educate her children “to virtue” (Beeton 300). This goal of rearing children capable of demonstrating moral excellence and chastity is of course admirable, but it is subtly different from the American model. Virtue, alone, is not necessarily the same as civic virtue, as is held up for admiration in the articles in Godey’s (Ellet) (Simms), and it is certainly not the same as civic accomplishment, or, for that matter, any kind of accomplishment at all.
It is interesting, and yet another reflection of the status of women in 1861, when her book was originally published, to note that all the authorities which Isabella Beeton cites are male. Although she manages an international nod to the United States by quoting Washington Irving, sadly she could not include a quote from a woman to credibly support her contentions. Goethe is male, and the other Godey’s articles cited herein are also by men.
There is not a huge difference between the two views of women and their roles in Godey’s and Mrs.Beeton’s. However, the class structure definitely impresses itself on the mood of Mrs. Beeton’s, and adds an extra layer of obstacle to women’s freedom, movement, mobility, and independence. Additionally, where Godey’s woman is responsible for helping her husband and children to serve the new country, Beeton’s lady is responsible for helping her husband save his soul, safeguarding her children’s moral standing, and maintaining the social class structure. In both instances, the woman is expected to be competent at managing a household enterprise thriftily, with all the associated tasks of human resource management, real estate, food production and preservation, and possibly animal husbandry, gardening, education, among others, while retaining religious faith, good temper, social graces, and personal daintiness2.
Bibliography
Beeton, Isabella. “Mrs. Beeton’s Book of Household Management, Chapter 1, The Mistress.” Ed. French, and Poska. n.d. 300-301.
Ellet, E.F. “Heroic Women of the Revolution.” 2010. Godey’s Lady’s Book, March 1850. University of Rochester. Web.
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. “The Sphere of Woman.” 2010. Godey’s Lady’s Book, March 1850. University of Rochester. Web.
Simms, W. Gilmore. “Katherine Walton: or, The Partisan’s Daughter: A Tale of the Revolution.” 2010. Godey’s Lady’s Book, March, 1850. Web.
Footnotes
1 – The chapter in the book of Proverbs from which this verse is excerpted goes on to describe in detail the complex artisanal, husbandry, and entrepreneurial activity in which an Old Testament wife was expected to engage, independently, for the profit and support of her family. It is a bit ironic that this approach to women’s responsibility was reflected throughout the Bible, and formed the basis for the tradition, amongst some more modern Jewish populations, of women working out in the world, often in very responsible positions requiring higher education, to support their husbands in their exclusive study of sacred scripture.
2 – It is instructive to recall that both English and Yankee women were expected to accomplish all this without any representation politically and without indoor plumbing, birth control, or monthly sanitary protection.
Virginia Woolf broaches the subject of Shakespeare by exploring the fact that a professor whose work she has studied suggests that a woman could never write anything in the way of the playwright’s genius. It is her conclusion that, at any rate, it would have been impossible for a woman to match the genius of Shakespeare in the time of Shakespeare (Woolf, 3).
Woolf posits that if Shakespeare had had a sister, and this sister matched Shakespeare in adventurousness and imagination, she would have had no opportunity to exercise these qualities in likeness to that of Shakespeare himself. Shakespeare, Woolf explains, would have been sent to a private school where he would have learned rules of logic and grammar while this sister would have been offered no such opportunity (Woolf, 3).
Her parents would have discouraged her from even musing about in Shakespeare’s papers and books. Her suggestions seem accurate and well thought out. She is saying that capability was not the determining factor in females’ realizing genius. Preparation and opportunity also must be present, and these things were not afforded to females of Shakespeare’s time.
Shakespeare would have ventured to London with his inclination for the theater, acting and living at the center of creativity at the time (Woolf, 3). Woolf suggests his fictional sister, posed here for the purpose of argument, would have been betrothed and forced by the fire of her similar talents to shame her father and abandon that betrothal. This is obviously something that cannot be verified. Woolf, his carried away by her admiration for the struggles a female of genius would have had to endure.
She takes her example here to the extreme, and in so doing cheapens her main point. It is not necessary for the fictional heroine of her example to flee a betrothal and kill herself out of a need to preserve her brilliance. The fact of the matter is, most women in this circumstance simply endured the confines of the expectations placed upon them and did not end their lives out of some desperate need to honor their talents or die. Yet, with all the mangled passions of a poet trapped inside Shakespeare’s fictional sister so painfully, she would have, Woolf, imagines, committed suicide to escape the pain of so little self-actualization.
She continues to describe the impossibility of Judith, even if she had existed, possessing a genius like Shakespeare’s, because Shakespeare’s genius is one that emerges in aristocracy. The servility pressed upon women is not the soil from which that type of genius could spring (Woolf, 3).
This is a completely believable assertion. Women who needed to earn their sense of self from constantly performing tasks to others’ expectations would have naturally become, in some fashion, mentally dependant. If there is any component that all genius shares, it is originality, and this feature would have had little opportunity to flourish when constantly met with an expectation of subservience.
The genius of fiction in a man is met with indifference by the world. The genius of fiction in a woman is met with a scoff (Woolf, 3). The difference in the response is explained by Woolf through assigning to the world a plausible statement it may as well have made to either sex in reference to such fictional genius. The world told men their writing made no difference and told the women to write at all was ridiculous (Woolf, 3). She explains how difficult it is for a man to write an entire work from his mind without impediment to highlight how much more daunting the task must have seemed to women inclined.
This is where she comes upon the truth of incandescence of Shakespeare’s mind. His work, she points out, bears no hint to his inner sufferings, to his pains, or to his grievances with the world, but manages to stand on its own—complete musings of a writer who was able to drive out, through the light of his blinding brilliance, entire, self-sustaining fictions that require no consideration of intention of the author. The meaning of her analysis of Shakespeare is that he, being of a genius supported by the freedom of his family’s status and his gender, is put in an optimal circumstance from which to bring to life his elaborate, plot-driven, imagination.
To this, it is easy to respond with a simple question. Does Woolf believe that all creative genius is wasted when used to combat personal plight? In looking at Shakespeare’s work it is not impossible to view his inclinations for certain forms of drama. Does this not provide insight into who the author was, and what she preferred? In Woolf’s determination to paint women in the light of the forsaken and mistreated, she creates for herself a need to define creative genius in a very limited way. Though from aristocracy works can be created that have little to do with the unmet, fundamental needs of the masses, which does not mean that such work is superior.
That is not the nature of Shakespeare’s superiority. His gift was one of language, and the fact that a person of his genius would not have been afforded the opportunity to work if born into a lower class is more indicative of the kinds of discrimination that were common in the age. If people valued work that reflected common struggles, perhaps women would have been provided an opportunity to indulge in the arts without forsaking their roles. Perhaps artist and woman would not have been a juxtaposition of terms.
Woolf’s Research
Woolf finds that female writers, as they begin to appear in print sometime after the Elizabethan Era, often use their poetic inclinations to struggle with the role of women in society. She finds that women poets like Lady Winchilsea burst with indignation in their writings (Woolf, 4). Lady Winchilsea’s mind, in contrast to Shakespeare’s, is rife with impediments to the pure experience of a creative heart. Woolf notices that Lady Winchilsea of the seventeenth century is able to set aside her indignation, her sense of oppression, and write with the natural embers of the creative spirit lighting the way to her words (Woolf, 4).
Woolf simply points out that this ability is blighted by the indignation present in most of Winchilsea’s writings. Woolf ultimately criticizes Lady Winchilsea for never being able to free herself from all that bound her gift. She compares the state of her talent to a flower growing out of weeds and briars (Woolf, 4). Here again, she undervalues the courage innate in such displays, and the necessity of female artists of the time addressing the nature of their confinements with all the passion that confinement would create.
Woolf continues, discussing next Margaret Cavendish. She expresses a sense of shame that Cavendish ventured into obscurity rather than to fight the good fight publicly. This is a contrast to Woolf’s assessment of Lady Winchilsea. Whereas Winchilsea wrote and exposed her work to the public without ever freeing herself of her grievances, Cavendish was so crippled by her passion and its context that she could not bear exposure. Here, again, it is worth noting that Woolf does not assign credit to Cavendish for having the courage to keep writing in the face of all that oppressed her.
She then examines one Dorothy Osborne in her letters. She explains this woman as having a talent that she was never allowed the freedom to explore professionally (Woolf 4). Her criticism in this case seems to be on the state of the world, and not directed at Osborne, noting that Osborne was made to believe that her writing was futile and ridiculous (Woolf, 4). Though this critique of the world is expressed here through the case of Osborne and her letters, it is implied in the criticisms of the previous writers as well.
Woolf seems harder on writers who came closer to self-actualization, whereas she finds Dorothy Osborne’s unrecognized talent cause for pity. This is baffling. Osborne is by all rational standards less of a success than Cavendish and Winchilsea, and yet receives none of the criticism Woolf gives to either of them.
Alphra Behn is the next writer covered by Woolf and is described as a transcendental figure. Behn is forced to make her living off of her wits, and in so doing creates for herself a life of independence. She sets a precedent, Woolf explains and realizes the possibility of women making money from their writings—something that made the endeavor seem practical for the first time. This is something Woolf admires and praises. It seems that Woolf has no admiration for those caught in between servility and independence, and praise for those conditioned in either.
In the nineteenth century, Woolf finds that there emerged many female authors. She is intrigued by the fact that these authors only seem to write novels. She makes note of the fact that Jane Austin, having to hide her manuscript as something taboo when the company approached her workspace, managed to create a work without the impediments referred to above. Woolf notes that her writing is remarkably similar to that of Shakespeare’s incandescence (Woolf 4).
Grace Poole, Woolf suggests, is an example of a genius greater than that of Austin’s, but trapped by the indignations she expresses in protest to her lot.
Virginia Woolf begins to reconcile her findings through an understanding of the various pushes and pulls women had to deal with to create any work of fiction. The successes of Jane Austin and Emily Bronte were idiosyncratic. They were special, she explains, as they both had that quality of incandescence. The fact that all women were writing without any heritage to look to in reference forced them to rework the schema of a novel into something feminine, without sacrificing any integrity as writers. This is the task they all faced, and this is the explanation Woolf gives for why so many were stunted and distracted while crafting their fiction.
Works Cited
Woolf, Virginia. “A Room of One’s Own.” Lecture to the Arts Society at Newnham 1928: two papers. EBooks@Adelaide. 2010. The University of Adelaide. Web.