Dear Sir,
'There is, I believe, in every disposition a tendency to some particular evil, a natural defect, which not even the best education can overcome'.
'And your defect is a propensity to hate everybody'.
'And yours', he replied with a smile, 'is willfully to misunderstand them'.
Did you really think I was comparing the position of the 20th century registered nurse with the 19th century governess? I'm sure you didn't. The point I was trying to make was that, in a world where employment options were so very limited, and employment itself was not seen as something that a woman of the middle and upper classes should aim for, governessing was not likely to be too thrilling an occupation, and these women would be very liable to exploitation. Have you happened to read Mrs Gaskell's 'Wives and Daughters?' Miss Clare's lot does not seem such an enviable one, prior to her marriage, even though she was not treated unkindly. Now, I know that the employment options for men were also limited, but those required to earn their living still had a far greater range of options than women in the same position.
Find me just one joyful, fulfilled governess!
Good luck,
Julie
Dear Julie,
This is too much cruelty! You used Darcy's words against ME--and that hurts. This is a low blow--I mean a blow from down-under. Well, I can only say
'There is a stubbornness about me that never can bear to be frightened at the will of others. My courage always rises with every attempt to intimidate me.'
Like all low blows, it carries the match for you and, like all low blows, the blow transmitted the desired effect without being so very accurate. Did you really think I did not intend to compare the position of the 20th century registered nurse with the 19th century governess? I never accused you of making that comparison, but it was certainly my intent. The problem is that there are a few industrial-era notions that you celebrate and that I label "snare and delusion". I don't believe that there is such a thing as a "career"--what a silly idea. There are only relationships. Men know these things, we learned them the hard way. Women will learn these bitter truths as well, but for now, it is quite useful for the industrial organization to help women imagine that they are embarking on a path that will allow them to do something like write Pride and Prejudice. In fact, they are merely doubling the white-collar labor supply (and, thereby, reducing white-collar wages.) There are a lot of women in this world who are going to discover that they have become far more like a character in an Arthur Miller play than anything like Jane Austen--God help them. The great irony is that Jane Austen actually wrote Pride and Prejudice while eschewing any employment. She wrote about relationships and avoided any nonsense about employment "opportunities".
You wished me luck to "Find me just one joyful, fulfilled governess!" I nominate Mrs. Weston. How about Mrs. Goddard? Jane Fairfax was a paid companion to Miss Campbell and met her future husband in that society, a VERY good match--wouldn't you agree? Perhaps I needn't be so abstract; surely there were a great number of women who felt fulfilled from that kind of nurturing. It is in a woman's nature to nurture, that is why so many become nurses. Remember, Jane Austen wrote about a time before so many women were being deluded and then ensnared.
Ashton
Dear Ashton,
Remember our last exchange about governesses (5/8/98, 5/8/98R)? It would only be reasonable to clear that one up before starting to bicker about something else. As I remember, your contention was that governessing was overall not such a bad life, and that governesses were treated 'like the gentlewomen they were'. I wonder. Firstly, just consider the limitations - suppose, like the majority of people, one didn't have any aptitude for teaching, and no particular affinity with small children? Personally, I would rather clean toilets than teach small children, which is probably why I became a nurse. It must have been immensely frustrating to know that, whatever one's talents, elementary teaching was the only avenue open - girls up to the age of seventeen, and small boys before they were offered up for human sacrifice in the English Public School system - and that only if they had no tutor.
Just imagine - governessing meant that one could never live at home again. If the position were good, it was also temporary - the older one got, and therefore the less likely to enjoy change - the closer one got to having to change positions, as the pupils grew up. If the position were bad, tough. There was no governess union, and the employer's reference was everything.
The ambiguous position of the governess in the household has been well documented - a gentlewoman, but often resented by the servants who waited upon her, who knew that she was an employee like themselves. Her social position meant that she could only socialize with the family, or those within reach of 'solitary female walking', which wasn't far. There was no chance of nipping down to the pub on Friday nights to governess club. Unless her position was very near her family home, she could only correspond by letter, apart from a few weeks' annual holiday - and if they were far away, the cost of travelling could have been a problem.
And of course, the very fact of her employment identified her as poor, and unwanted in marriage - two heavy social burdens.
Though Jane Austen has certainly portrayed Miss Taylor's lot as comfortable, and I am sure such situations existed, even in her case Mr Knightley pointed out 'it must be much better to have only one person to please, rather than two', pointing out, subtly, that, though well treated and respected, Miss Taylor nevertheless had to please - and please Mr Woodhouse! (Yeeks!). Other governess references in the same novel are much darker - see how Mrs Elton feels entitled to treat Miss Fairfax on the strength of what she sees as an inferior social position. Miss Fairfax is hardly jumping for joy at her prospective fate, nor are her relatives, or her guardians, and Emma is aghast that Mr Churchill could have 'suffered her to engage herself! What a horrible indelicacy!'
Again in 'Mansfield Park': re 'Lovers' Vows' (the Hon. Mr Yates) 'Cottager's wife! At Ecclesford the governess was to have done it! A bit more justice please, Mr manager, else you do not deserve your post!' Mr Bertram "...and as the governess was either sick or run away....."
No, I don't think so. Though their positions may have been comfortable,
this was problematic, and I feel that these women would have been very
vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. I bet there was not a large group of
wealthy girls clamoring to go a-governessing.
Julie
Dearest Julie,
I am so very glad that you have returned. You don't have to be told that I admire you and that I am very fond of your conversation. Therefore, you will not be surprised to learn how glad I am to hear Australian nurses are treated so well. It is easily inferred from your posting that your nursing supervisors are far more pleasing than Mr. Woodhouse and that no one at the hospital feels "entitled to treat a nurse on the strength of what he sees as an inferior social position" (not even a doctor?) American nurses are not always so fortunate.
Well, I may tease you, but I understand that any nurse, down-under or up-over, is far better off that 99% of the working women (or men) in this world. Umm--except for the working women portrayed on television these days. However, there is always something better and people everywhere will try to make distinctions in the manner of Mrs. Elton, and, try as we may, they get to us.
I would say much the same things about a regency-period governess, school mistress, or paid companion. I would say that to the extent that these matters can be gleaned from Jane Austen's novels.
carrying the weight of exoticness and flavour
on backs tried before
rough rugged shells point-
ing to (heaven)--
fashionably striking a pose
to glamour
and washing decency
to gutter 8
while he looks at revivals
i cement you
icementyoustay
stay
for your glamourous pose
will keep me away
from timely sections of my
existence
denied (defied) deathed
to gutter 9
and burned
like wasted flesh
I suppose it is obvious to everyone that Lavanya very much approves of what is happening at this web site and compliments the wisdom of the leadership as well as the energy and quality of the community participation.
My next guess is based upon the geography and sociology of the Inferno. I can't vouch for my understanding, but my impression is that the Inferno is shaped like a cone with a flat bottom. It is built up of nine concentric "circles" with ever decreasing diameter. The ninth circle is at the center and bottom, and is Hades. The eighth circle is closest to the fire and is reserved for the punishment of frauds. That circle is further sub-divided into ten "rings". I should have thought that there were more categories; no matter, it appears that I am, someday, to investigate this place more closely. I don't know very much at present, so you will have to explore the place for yourself: I noticed that Dante appointed a poet to be your guide.
I can't figure out where our poet has me standing: Am I washing "decency" to the eighth level because that is where I am standing or is it merely that I am declaring "decency" to be a fraud. This question probably seems irrelevant to all of you, but where I am standing is an important matter to me. Exaggeration is not a sin per se--accidents happen. However, exaggeration in the mouth of the poet might be a betrayal of the art and that is a sin. On the other hand, no Web Meister can condemn himself--that must be left to another. It also appears that I am a kind of intellectual speed bump or maybe a speed bump on the grand highway of human progress. Be patient, Lavanya, all speed bumps are worn down eventually. (I think the grand highway is actually a closed traffic circle: If true, then I will have my consolation as well.) In the end, it must be said that Lavanya's condemnation is very well done and would have had the desired effect if it were not for the fact that it takes far more than just a few words to chip away this rough, rugged shell. There will be no penetration at all if those words only evoke and do not prove.
Has anyone else discovered the "Jane Austen Mysteries" by Stephanie Barron?
I never meant to imply that most Regency Englishwomen habitually went about entirely uncorseted; I think the word "corset" is itself a stumbling-block here, because it tends to automatically bring to mind a stereotyped image of an 1880's or 1890's type model. Early 19th century Englishwomen did usually wear "stays" (this was the word most used then), but such "stays" generally did not go down as far as a true Victorian corset, and did not have constricting the waist as a goal. That said, if a Regency woman wanted to shape her figure, she could obtain more elaborate underthings -- but on the other hand, if a woman were relatively content with her figure, she could get by with fairly minimal "stays" which would not restrict her mobility very much (something which was not really true of Victorian times...)
Henry Churchyard
Jane Austen Info
Page:
janeinfo@pemberley.com
From the Board Meister: Thank you for
these
clarifying remarks and thank you
for producing that excellent web
page.
Links