Modern Women and What Is Said of Them

Part 1

Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Lisa Reigel, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was made using scans of public domain works from the University of Michigan Digital Libraries.)

MODERN WOMEN

AND

WHAT IS SAID OF THEM

A REPRINT OF

A SERIES OF ARTICLES IN THE

SATURDAY REVIEW

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

MRS. LUCIA GILBERT CALHOUN

NEW YORK J. S. REDFIELD, PUBLISHER 140 FULTON STREET 1868

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by

J. S. REDFIELD,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York.

EDWARD O. JENKINS, PRINTER AND STEREOTYPER, No. 20 North William St.

ADVERTISEMENT.

The following papers on Woman were originally published in the columns of the London SATURDAY REVIEW. Some of them have already been reprinted in the literary and daily journals of this country, and they have excited no little discussion and comment among readers of both sexes.

Whether agreeing or not with the writer, it is impossible not to concede the eminent ability with which the various subjects are handled. No series of essays has appeared in the English language for many years which has been so extensively reprinted and so generally read.

The authorship of these papers has been attributed to different individuals, male and female; but it is more than probable that the writers whose names have been mentioned in this connection are precisely those who have had nothing whatever to do with them. It is not unlikely that, in due time, the publisher of this volume may be in possession of authentic information on this head, and that the name of the author may then appear on the title-page.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION, 5

I.--THE GIRL OF THE PERIOD, 25

II.--FOOLISH VIRGINS, 34

III.--LITTLE WOMEN, 43

IV.--PINCHBECK, 52

V.--PUSHING WOMEN, 61

VI.--FEMININE AFFECTATIONS, 73

VII.--IDEAL WOMEN, 83

VIII.--WOMAN AND THE WORLD, 93

Part 2

IX.--UNEQUAL MARRIAGES, 101

X.--HUSBAND-HUNTING, 109

XI.--PERILS OF "PAYING ATTENTION," 118

XII.--WOMEN'S HEROINES, 128

XIII.--INTERFERENCE, 138

XIV.--PLAIN GIRLS, 148

XV.--A WORD FOR FEMALE VANITY, 157

XVI.--THE ABUSE OF MATCH-MAKING, 167

XVII.--FEMININE INFLUENCE, 177

XVIII.--PIGEONS, 188

XIX.--AMBITIOUS WIVES, 198

XX.--PLATONIC WOMAN, 206

XXI.--MAN AND HIS MASTER, 215

XXII.--THE GOOSE AND THE GANDER, 225

XXIII.--ENGAGEMENTS, 235

XXIV.--WOMAN IN ORDERS, 243

XXV.--WOMAN AND HER CRITICS, 253

XXVI.--MISTRESS AND MAID, ON DRESS AND UNDRESS, 262

XXVII.--ÆSTHETIC WOMAN, 272

XXVIII.--WHAT IS WOMAN'S WORK? 281

XXIX.--PAPAL WOMAN, 291

XXX.--MODERN MOTHERS, 300

XXXI.--PRIESTHOOD OF WOMAN, 309

XXXII.--THE FUTURE OF WOMAN, 319

XXXIII.--COSTUME AND ITS MORALS, 329

XXXIV.--THE FADING FLOWER, 339

XXXV.--LA FEMME PASSÉE, 347

XXXVI.--PRETTY PREACHERS, 355

Part 3

XXXVII.--SPOILT WOMEN, 364

INTRODUCTION.

The "Woman Question" will not be put to silence. It demands an answer of Western legislators. It besets college faculties. It pursues veteran politicians to the fastnesses of so-called National Conventions. Under the sacred sounding-boards of New England pulpits has its voice been heard, and its unexpected ally, the London SATURDAY REVIEW, introduces it to the good society of English drawing-rooms. That this introduction comes in the form of diatribe and denunciation is a matter of the least moment. Judgment will finally rest, not on the conclusions of the special pleader, but on the strength of the case of the accused.

Something, clearly, is wrong with fashionable women. They accept the thinnest gilt, the poorest pinchbeck, for gold. They care more for a dreary social pre-eminence than for home and children. They find in extravagance of living and a vulgar costliness of dress their only expression of a vague desire for the beauty and elegance of life. Is it, therefore, to be inferred that the race of noble women is dying out? St. Paul was hardly less severe than the London SATURDAY, if less explicit, in his condemnation of the fashionable women of his day, yet we look upon that day as heroic. Certainly neither London nor New York can rival the luxury of a rich Roman matron, yet it was not the luxury of her women which destroyed the empire, and Brutus's Portia was quite as truly a representative woman as the superb Messalina. John Knox thought that things were as bad as they could possibly be when he thundered at vice in high places; and if there had been a John Knox in the court of Charles the Second, he would have sighed for a return of the innocent days of his great-grandfather.

On the whole, that hope which springs eternal suggests that the fashionable women of the reign of Victoria, and of our seventeenth President, are not essentially more discouraging than all the generations of the thoughtless fair who danced idly down forgotten pasts. Nay, we may even hope that they are better. If they will not actually think, yet the fatal contagion of the newspaper and the modern novel communicates to them an intellectual irritation which might almost stand for a mental process. If they have not ideas, they have notions of things, and however inexact and absurd these may be, they are better than emptiness.

"Worse, decidedly worse," says our implacable critic; "when women were content with looking pretty before marriage, and with good housekeeping after, they were uninteresting certainly, but they were respectable. Now they dabble in all things; are weakly æsthetic, weakly scientific, weakly controversial, and wholly prosy, and contemptible." Dabbling is pitiful, certainly, and weakness has few allies, but let us do justice even to the weak dabblers. Æsthetic, or scientific, or controversial training has but recently been made possible to women. Their previous range of study had been very narrow. It is not strange that the least attainments should seem to them very profound and satisfactory, and the most manifest deductions pass for original conclusions. It is natural that their undisciplined faculties should grapple feebly with difficulties, and be quite unequal to argument. This is no reason for flinging the baffling volumes at their heads; better so educate their heads that the volumes shall no longer baffle.

Scolded because they have not an idea beyond dress, laughed at when they try to think of something better, a word may certainly be said for the good temper and the patience even of the fashionable women, who would be wiser if they could.

The fault is, we are assured, that these women take up books only to enhance their matrimonial value, and with no thought of the worth of study. Let us be just. What business or the professions are to most men, marriage is to most women. Men qualify themselves, if they can, for that competitive examination which is always going on, and which insures clients to the best lawyers, and business to the best merchant, and parishes to the best preacher. Women, compelled to wait at home for the wooing which changes their destiny, qualify themselves with attractions for that competitive examination which all marriageable young women feel that they undergo from every marriageable young man. Each has an eye to business. One does not feel that the motive in the one case is any higher than in the other.

It is very bad, of course, that marriage should be a matter of business. It is, perhaps, the most tragic of all perversions. But, evidently, the evil is not to be abated by jeremiads, nor by lectures to young women, no, nor even by brilliant editorials. So long as women believe that inglorious ease is better than work, so long as they are taught that they are born to be the gentle dependents of a stronger being, so long as courage and capacity are held to be "strong-minded," so long as the range of employments for women is narrow, and the standard of wages lower than men's, so long they will seek in marriage a home, a larger liberty of action, an establishment, a servant who shall supply them with money and insure them ease without effort of their own.

Men take the business opening which seems most congenial and most profitable. Women do the same thing, and their choice naturally falls upon marriage as altogether the most promising speculation of their very small list. The remedy seems to be to give women as thorough mental training as men receive, to make their training tend as directly to the business of earning their bread and their pretty feminine adornments, and for the same work to pay them the same wages. If it be objected that fashionable women will not work, let it be answered that work itself would be fashionable if it were held to be a dignity, and not a drudgery, and that the really fine and thoughtful leaders of society could easily establish the new order of things. In an aristocratic country, where labor is the badge of caste, it would be difficult to make it honorable. In a democracy like our own, it is the most contemptible snobbishness which frowns on the honest earning of money.

The accusation of prodigal and senseless expenditure in dress must stand unrefuted. Sums which would adorn our cities with pleasure-gardens, with libraries, with galleries of art, are spent on perishable gauds that have not even beauty to commend them. Charities might be founded, lives be enriched with travel, all lands laid under contribution with the money that every year flows into Stewart's drawers, and the strong-boxes of fashionable dress-makers. But the jewelled prodigals who spend it are not more selfish, perhaps, than we plain folks who carp.

Continue reading Modern Women and What Is Said of Them free in the Wunder reader →