Wapping Up

Hello everyone!

Well this is my last blog and I just wanted to thank Doc. Jones for putting on this inspiring class for us. For me, this class is a reminder of all the time and effort women from our past has to put in to ensure women writers had their freedom be to creative and speak/write their options. Still is hard to believe that women were and still are, in some countries, treated poorly and not respected. People like Anne Askew burning at the stake because of her religious beliefs and her right to preach her religion.  

Imagine trying to be a female writer, writing in a time with so many constrains. By speaking or writing your own opinions could either get you killed, beaten or put in jail. The approaches to Feminist literature is inspiring, and makes one proud to be a woman!!

I was looking through my notes from the beginning of the year and I found this:

Today
• Women constitute the majority of readers, and buyers, of fiction
• Women usually outnumber men in literature courses
• University English departments are usually closer to gender parity (equal)

Publishers are happy women are writing now..lol

Wolfe

Bring the conversation back to Wolfe and “A room of ones own”, it is really amazing to me that Wolfe was the first feminist to put her opinions of mistreated women on paper. She was a  modernist writer talking about being a writer and female writing tradition literature. She tried to reclaim writing tradition and in my opinion she did, because she got a lot of other people talking about the issue, whether it be positive or negative. Many women followed in her footsteps and gained more confidence in finding their own voices in literature.

Master’s Tools

The phrase “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house”, Lorde attacked the underlying racism of feminism, describing it as unrecognized dependence on the patriarchy. She argued that, by denying difference in the category of women, feminists merely passed on old systems of oppression and that, in so doing, they were preventing any real, lasting change. Her argument aligned white feminists with white male slave-masters, describing both as “agents of oppression”.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audre_Lorde.

I think they can use the Master’s Tools in a meaningful way.  I am sure after reading the criticism angered many women writers enough to get them to voice their own opinions regarding Lorde’s brand of feminism. The more women writers, the better, even if they are angry.

My opinion has changed over this course, because I never realized what women writers had to go through in the past to find their voice. It makes me appreciate my life now and how so many women today are winning awards for their writing. 

Empowering course, HERE’S TO ALL THE GREAT WOMEN WRITERS!!

Thanks again Dr. Jones!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Sarah Fielding (Nov 8, 1710 – Apr 9, 1768)

List of Works by Fielding
1744 – The Adventures of David Simple
1747 – Familiar Letters between the Principal Characters in David Simple
1749 – The Governess, or The LittleFemaleAcademy
1749 – Remarks on Clarissa
1753 – David Simple: Volume the Last
1754 – The Cry: A New Dramatic Fable (with Jane Collier)
1757 – The Lives of Cleopatra and Octavia
1759 – The History of the Countess of Dellwyn
1761 – The History of Ophelia
1762 – Xenophon’s Memoirs of Socrates, with the Defense of Socrates Before His Judges

  

 I thought I would include my Wikipedia assignment on Sarah Fielding. Enjoy!

FINAL Sarah Fielding Wikipedia

I hope that worked 🙂

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Delarivier Manley “The Adventures of Rivella”

Hello,

Well, Well.. Look what I found searching around for information to share with you from the below blog.  You should notice a familiar name if you scroll down. 🙂

http://jannainspa.blogspot.com/2005/11/delarivier-manley-adventures-of.html

Delarivier Manley in her, “The Adventures of Rivella” provides a fictional account mixed with biographical information as well as some detailed descriptions that give hints about counterparty individuals and events. It was interesting that Manley told the story of Rivella through the eyes of a male. She begins her story with the fictitious characters of Sir Charles Lovemore and Chevalier D’Aumont who are in a private conversation. Sir Charles discusses his personal interaction with Rivella and her life experiences. However, it is confusing and contradictory when Rivella’s appearance is discussed because Lovemore indicates that her appearance is pleasing yet at the same time, the story indicates she suffered from small pox which permanently scares the victims. Lovemore indicates that he loves Rivella and presents her as a wonderful, witty, and alluring female. However, she falls into disgrace and is imprisoned because of her writings. The story is further complicated when various characters and their activities are revealed and that they take place in relation to actual events such as the deposition of James II (Manley, 60). The names of the fictional characters in some cases refer to actual individuals and their identity is provided in Appendix A (Manley 118-120). Manley discusses actual events, comments about herself, and gives information about contemporary individuals which is confusing for the modern reader but exposing and scandalous to her contemporaries. Rivella discusses her involvement with unethical individuals in a major lawsuit that mirrors an actual lawsuit. Rivella is ruined in her marriage and also reveals that she is the author of the controversial Atalantis. Lovemore says, “… she told me that her self was author of the Atalantis…” (Manley, 107). Rivella causes much scandal and innocent individuals are harmed by her writings. When confronted with these charges by Lovemore, she simply says that she did this because she hates men and wanted to expose individuals to vent her anger. Lovemore says, “…I began with railing at her books; the barbarous design of exposing people that never had done her any injury; she answered me she was become misanthrope, a perfect Timon, or man-hater…” (Manley, 107). Manley’s approach in Rivella is interesting because she speaks through a male and uses a fictional account to reveal private information about contemporary individuals, insights about herself, and attempts to justify her motives and actions. Perhaps her overall justification for her indiscretions is as Lovemore states: “…what is not a crime in men is scandalous and unpardonable in woman…” (Manley, 47).

2 Comments:

Blogger hardly hyacinth said…Manley certainly chose interesting names for her characters. I particularly liked Hilaria as the character I could really love to hate. There is a smirk that goes with the name she gave Palmer. 8:44 AM
 
Blogger Miriam Jones said… I hope we will talk in class about her interesting tactic of using a male narrator, and he in conversation with another male. 9:19 AM

I will have to remind you to discuss the male narrator in class 🙂

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Mary Wollstonecraft

Just found this classroom lesson for students, found it very interesting and thought I would share it with you.

Mary Wollstonecraft Debates
Jean-Jacque Rousseau, 1791 ©1996-2011

 

The Enlightenment was a time when writers and thinkers sharply debated questions about women’s rights. Issues of women’s options were framed in terms of “patriotic motherhood.” “liberty,” “natural rights,” and “emancipation” from familial control.
Both male and female Enlightenment thinkers and writers appeared on both sides of the issues. Mary Wollstonecraft, writer of the influential “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman,” responded to a French proposal to educate girls only up the the age of eight, when they then should be trained in domestic duties at home. She feared the ideas of the famous writer Jean-Jacque Rousseau, who in his novels, such as Emile (1762), drove home the point that women’s education must prepare them to serve men. While glorifying women as wife and mother, he thought that nature had made her “to submit to man and to endure even injustice at his hands.”

Rousseau:  “…..This habitual restraint produces a docility which woman requires all her life long, for she will always be in subjection to a man, or a man’s judgment, and she will never be free to set her own opinion above his. What is most wanted in a woman is gentleness…A man, unless he is a perfect monster, will sooner or later yield to his wife’s gentleness, and the victory will be hers.
Once it is demonstrated that men and women neither are nor, and should not be, constituted the same, either in character or in temperament, it follows that they should not have the same education…Boys want movement and noise, drums, tops, toy-carts; girls prefer things which appeal to the eye, and can be used for dressing-up-mirrors, jewelry, finery, and specially dolls. The doll is the girl’s special plaything; this shows her instinctive bent towards her life’s work. Little girls always dislike learning to read and write, but they are always ready to learn to sew…The search for abstract and speculative truths for principles and axioms in science, for all that tends to wide generalizations, is beyond a woman’s grasp.”

Wollstonecraft responds:  “What opinion are we to form of a system of education, when the author (Rousseau in Emile) says…‘Educate women like men, and the more they resemble our sex the less power will they have over us.’ This is the very point I am at. I do not wish them to have power over men, but over themselves. The most perfect education, in my opinion, is …to enable the individual to attain such habits of virtue as will render it independent. In fact, it is a farce to call any being virtuous whose virtues do not result from the exercise of its own reason.
This was Rousseau’s opinion respecting men: I extend it to women…To reason on Rousseau’s ground, if man did attain a degree of perfection of mind when his body arrived at maturity, it might be proper, in order to make a man and his wife one, that she should rely entirely on his understanding; and the graceful ivy, clasping the oak that supported it, would form a whole in which strength and beauty would be equally conspicuous. But, alas! husbands, as well as their helpmates, are often only overgrown children; nay, thanks to early debauchery, scarcely men in their outward form – and if the blind lead the blind, one need not come from heaven to tell us the consequence…
To be a good mother a woman must have sense, and that independence of mind which few women possess who are taught to depend entirely on their husbands. Meek wives are, in general, foolish mothers…
If children are to be educated to understand the true principle of patriotism, their mother must be a patriot…make women rational creatures, and free citizens, and they will quickly become good wives, and mothers; that is-if men do not neglect the duties of husbands and fathers.”

Discussion/Activity Suggestions:

* Hold a debate: one group, or person, argues Rousseau’s thesis –   the other Wollstonecraft’s.
* Find phrases that use Enlightenment vocabulary and ideas such as natural rights, patriotism, independence.
* Do any of these arguments about essential difference in male/female attributes influence ideas about women’s intellectual abilities today? Are there areas today where you think inequality in the education of girls and boys still exists? Where? Are there events, places, or classes which you feel either gender mostly is excluded from? What are the? Is this okay, or do you have ideas on how this could be changed?

Research:
*What motivated Mary Wollstonecraft to write about women’s rights? What happened to her? Why was she vilified in some circles about her death?
*Explore the writings of some other male Englightenment thinkers to discover their views about women’s rights. Who might side with Rouseau? Who might lean toward Wollstonecraft?

http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/lesson16.html
Classroom Lesson Series 

Reading Source: Susan Groag Bell & Karen Offen, Women, the Family, and Freedom: The Debate in Documents, Volume One, 1750-1880. Stanford University Press, 1983.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Mary Wollstonecraft

Hello Everyone!

I wanted to start off with (what I think) the most important piece of literature written by Wollstonecraft for the fight for rights of women.

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
With Strictures on Political and Moral Subjects

Published in 1792, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman was the first great feminist treatise. Wollstonecraft preached that intellect will always govern and sought “to persuade women to endeavour to acquire strength, both of mind and body, and to convince them that the soft phrases, susceptibility of heart, delicacy of sentiment, and refinement of taste, are almost synonimous [sic] with epithets of weakness.”
CHAP. I. The rights and involved duties of mankind considered
CHAP. II. The prevailing opinion of a sexual character discussed
CHAP. III. The same subject continued
CHAP. IV. Observations on the state of degradation to which woman is reduced by various causes
CHAP. V. Animadversions on some of the writers who have rendered women objects of pity, bordering on contempt
CHAP. VI. The effect which an early association of ideas has upon the character
CHAP. VII. Modesty.—Comprehensively considered, and not as a sexual virtue
CHAP. VIII. Morality undermined by sexual notions of the importance of a good reputation
CHAP. IX. Of the pernicious effects which arise from the unnatural distinctions established in society
CHAP. X. Parental affection
CHAP. XI. Duty to parents
CHAP. XII. On national education
CHAP. XIII. Some instances of the folly which the ignorance of women generates; with concluding reflections on the moral improvement that a revolution in female manners may naturally be expected to produce

Found on: http://www.bartleby.com/144/

Amazing woman fighting for women’s rights! God bless. Sorry for the delay in this post, I was enjoying my March Break 🙂

Here are some quotes from Wollstonecraft

1) Children, I grant, should be innocent; but when the epithet is applied to men, or women, it is but a civil term for weakness.
2) How can a rational being be ennobled by any thing that is not obtained by its own exertions?
3) I do earnestly wish to see the distinction of sex confounded in society, unless where love animates the behaviour.
4) I love my man as my fellow; but his scepter, real, or usurped, extends not to me, unless the reason of an individual demands my homage; and even then the submission is to reason, and not to man.
5) If the abstract rights of man will bear discussion and explanation, those of women, by a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same test.
6) If women be educated for dependence; that is, to act according to the will of another fallible being, and submit, right or wrong, to power, where are we to stop?
7) In every age there has been a stream of popular opinion that has carried all before it, and given a family character, as it were, to the century.
8) In fact, it is a farce to call any being virtuous whose virtues do not result from the exercise of its own reason.
9) Independence I have long considered as the grand blessing of life, the basis of every virtue; and independence I will ever secure by contracting my wants, though I were to live on a barren heath.
10)It appears to me impossible that I should cease to exist, or that this active, restless spirit, equally alive to joy and sorrow, should be only organized dust.
11)It is time to effect a revolution in female manners – time to restore to them their lost dignity. It is time to separate unchangeable morals from local manners.
12)Learn from me, if not by my precepts, then by my example, how dangerous is the pursuit of knowledge and how much happier is that man who believes his native town to be the world than he who aspires to be greater than his nature will allow.
13)Make women rational creatures, and free citizens, and they will quickly become good wives; – that is, if men do not neglect the duties of husbands and fathers.
14)Men and women must be educated, in a great degree, by the opinions and manners of the society they live in.
15)No man chooses evil because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks.
16)Nothing contributes so much to tranquilizing the mind as a steady purpose – a point on which the soul may fix its intellectual eye.
17)Slavery to monarchs and ministers, which the world will be long freeing itself from, and whose deadly grasp stops the progress of the human mind, is not yet abolished.
18)Strengthen the female mind by enlarging it, and there will be an end to blind obedience.
19)Surely something resides in this heart that is not perishable – and life is more than a dream.
20)Taught from infancy that beauty is woman’s sceptre, the mind shapes itself to the body, and roaming round its gilt cage, only seeks to adorn its prison.
21)The beginning is always today.
22)The being cannot be termed rational or virtuous, who obeys any authority, but that of reason.
23)The divine right of husbands, like the divine right of kings, may, it is hoped, in this enlightened age, be contested without danger.
24)Virtue can only flourish among equals.
25)What, but the rapacity of the only men who exercised their reason, the priests, secured such vast property to the church, when a man gave his perishable substance to save himself from the dark torments of purgatory.
26)Why is our fancy to be appalled by terrific perspectives of a hell beyond the grave?
27)Women are degraded by the propensity to enjoy the present moment, and, at last, despise the freedom which they have not sufficient virtue to struggle to attain.
28)Women are systematically degraded by receiving the trivial attentions which men think it manly to pay to the sex, when, in fact, men are insultingly supporting their own superiority.
29)Women have seldom sufficient employment to silence their feelings; a round of little cares, or vain pursuits frittering away all strength of mind and organs, they become naturally only objects of sense.
30)Women ought to have representatives, instead of being arbitrarily governed without any direct share allowed them in the deliberations of government.

Found on http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=mary+wollstonecraft&view=detail&id=48CE948758524605014EADC9041B3A669CDB9BD7&first=31&FORM=IDFRIR

She makes me proud to be a woman!!! 🙂

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Aphra Behn (1640-1689)

Hello,

I found a very informative youtube video on Behn’s life and her accomplishments. This is a lecture for ENL 6455 at the University of North Florida by Professor Chris Gabbard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utPKWzTRC7I&feature=related

I found another video onThe Rover but it is a little racey, so I’m not going to post it. If you interested it is called Aphra Behn’s The Rover…In 4 Minutes.

Thought I would share, enjoy!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Margaret Cavendish, Aphra Behn, Katherine Philips

I found an interesting a couple of utube videos on

Margaret Cavendish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS8nAT8A3OA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yCN_8XwGDE

Aphra Behn 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utPKWzTRC7I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTduBVvZTU

Thought you may enjoy!

 Katherine Philips Plays and Poems – 

 Elizabeth Hageman on Katherine Philips:

 Katherine Philips (1632-1664) is best known today for some 140 poems she wrote on a variety of topics. Most popular among modern readers are a series of wonderful friendship poems, many of which Philips addressed to women whose sobriquets she took from literary texts popular in her own time–names  such as Lucasia, Rosania, and Ardelia. Philips’s own sobriquet was Orinda, a name she apparently crafted for herself, modifying female names such as Dorinda and Florinda to create a female name which resembles (perhaps even challenges) the names of male heroes such as Shakespeare’s Orlando and the Greek god Orion.

 Philips also wrote a series of letters that were published in 1705 under the title Letters from Orinda to Poliarchus.  In addition, she is important to literary history as the first female dramatist whose plays were produced in public theaters in both Dublin and London. (Unlike Aphra Behn, who is known for being the first woman to write professionally for the English stage, Philips was—as far as we know—not paid for either of her plays. Certainly, she was not paid for Horace, for as I note below, it was completed, performed, and printed after her death. And what she says in her letters to Poliarchus (Sir Charles Cotterell) about Pompey suggests that it was produced and then printed by aristocratic friends of hers, rather than as commercial enterprises for which she would be paid.)

 If you look at the title page of the printed edition of writings by Katherine Philips, you will see that Philips translated two plays by the French dramatist Pierre Corneille:  his Pompey and also his Horace.   We don’t know exactly why Philips chose those two plays, but in the context of this exhibit celebrating women’s writing, we should note that each of them features not one, but two important female characters. 

In Pompey, shown at right in the manuscript version of Philips’ plays, the Egyptian leader Ptolomy plots an underhanded way to murder the great Roman warrior Pompey. By the time the play is finished, both Ptolomy and Pompey are dead, but the play’s two women are very much alive.  Pompey’s widow Cornelia has shown herself to be a heroically loyal wife, and Ptolomy’s sister, the ambitious and honorable Cleopatra, is celebrated as the new Queen of Egypt.

 Philips’s Pompey was performed at the Theatre Royal in Dublin in February, 1663, and that spring it was printed in two editions: one in Dublin (March); the other in London (May). When Philips died of smallpox in June of 1664, she had not quite finished translating Horace, but it was completed by Sir John Denham and performed at the Court of Charles II in February, 1668. In that performance, the king’s mistress Lady Castlemaine played the role of Camilla, and the duchess of Monmouth was her sister-in-law Sabina. During the theatrical season of 1668-69, Horace was then performed by a professional acting company, the King’s Men, at Bridges Theatre in London. Marcelia by Elizabeth Boothby was performed by the King’s Men during the same season—and it was not long before other women—Aphra Behn, Mary Pix, Susanna Centlivre among them—were popular and successful London playwrights.

This should link you to a copy of the manuscript: Katherine Philips Manuscript  It shows you the cover and one page, just to give you an example. All information about on Katherine and these pictures found on website below:

http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=4020&showpreview=1

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized