What difficulties can you imagine for "Shakespeare's sister" the writer, in addition to those described by Woolf? Do you agree with her argument about why, until the twentieth century, there were so few female authors?
Try to relate your answer not only to A Room of One's Own, but also to the authors and characters we have read so far (draw on your knowledge of Shakespeare and Elizabethan England) or to your own knowledge of women writers since Woolf's time or throughout history.
As always, don't forget to use quotation marks for any direct quotes, and always acknowledge your sources!
Trivia questions of the week:
1. The years of Virginia Woolf's birth and death match exactly with those of which other famous writer?
2. How did Virginia Woolf die?
34 comments:
Loïs Berghout
VENS3C
Next to the fact that it was not accepted for a woman to write, if it had happened that Shakespeare’s sister had written a play, that it would not be read or not be accepted.
Men were very powerful in that time and it would have been a small miracle if her play would be taken into production but it would not be visited because it would be such a no go for the men. In that time women should not be writing. That was a men’s job.
Trivia:
1. James Joyce, writer of Ulysses.
2. She committed suicide by drowning herself in the River Ouse.
As Woolf describes Shakespeare’s sister she implies that women would have been discouraged to read or write, since they were expected to do the tasks that were women’s work. This discouragement could have been in the shape of protection against a world in which writing women were not accepted and therefore mothers and fathers would not allow their daughters to make a fool out of them and themselves. Of course, there would have been women who broke from their parents, like Shakespeare’s sister, because they saw no other way but to pursuit their passion. These women might have written plays, poems and sonnets as many as men in that time, but those would have never been published due to the mere fact that those were written by women. Women were not regarded to be of the same standard as men were and most of them could not decide on their own lives as this was to decide by her parents or husband. I agree with Woolf her perception and I think that if there were any works published by women, they would have used a men’s name instead. This was also Woolf’s belief as she writes in her essay: “She stood at the stage door; she wanted to act, she said. Men laughed in her face. The manager—a fat, loose-lipped man—guffawed. He bellowed something about poodles dancing and women acting—no woman, he said, could possibly be an actress.”
Debbie Straetemans - VENS3C
There were many difficulties for women who wished to be writers in the Elizabethan era. Women had no status whatsoever, weren't expected to think, weren't allowed to think, and had to obey their husbands.
They ofte had no schooling, and were regarded as not being smart enough for schooling either.
Even some years ago, Joanne Rowling published the Harry Potter books without revealing her first name; specifically - without revealing her gender. Not revealing her gender was advised by her publisher because there was a fear that people might not want to buy a book written by a woman.
Seeing as we are still dealing with this kind of nonsense, it comes as no surprise that women in the Elizabethan era only managed to publish anonymously.
LISANNE BAKKER VENS3C
Women in the Elizabethan era were meant to become housewives and take care of the children. They were not allowed to think, or expected to. There was no proper education for women in that time and they were simply thought of as not good enough for it either.
So, taking our Shakespeare's sister into account and looking at writing now. There were very few female writers and only now are they sort of becoming prominent in the writing area. I agree with Woolf's argument.To be comepletely honest. I think it is comepletely rubbish that men are better / allowed more. Eve was created for Adam, because he needed her. Eve didn't Adam.
(In my case though, men aren't particularly important to me. Unles its a dog or a prominent figure in my life. LMAO)
Babette Sutter
VENS3C
I found the chapter of this book very interesting to read. I agree with the writer that the reason there were so few female authors during that time, is because they were expected to become housewives and mothers. Very few women knew how to read and write, as this was strongly discouraged by society and important, ‘all-knowing’ men. The women that could read and write and wanted to publish their work, would have probably done it under a man’s name, like Woolf said. I wonder if there famous male authors from that time who were secretly women.
As for Shakespeare’s sister, I think some other difficulties could be:
- Not being able to live on her own, as no one will let a girl rent a place
- Not be able to find a job to support herself in London
I do believe that Woolf has a point. Many women were expected to do other things, female like things. These 'female like' things differ depending on the time setting. In the past, these female like things would be: washing the dishes, sewing clothes, cooking and so on. Females were looked down upon of they did not do any of these chores, but actually wanted to explore the world for what it is.
I believe that Shakespeare's sister also had trouble finding a stable financial income. Most men would not give her a job, because women were dependant of their husbands, but she ran away from her marriage in general. I also believe that it was difficult for her to find a man, since most marriages would be arranged by parents from a very young age.
Yessica van der Veere, VENS3C, 0893804
Virginia Woolf a great example of a female writer who did not shy away from expressing her thoughts and opinions through writing. I really enjoyed reading this and I plan on reading more.
The difficulties Shakespeare’s hypothetical sister, Judith, might face mentioned by Virginia Woolf were for example the lack of education and support. Another difficulty Judith might face could be the pressure women had to put on themselves to maintain a flawless facade for the outside world. I most certainly agree with Woolf’s argument about why there were so few female authors. Women must first break through a glass ceiling to get where they want to be and unfortunately that takes a lot of time. A lot of women who wanted to be writers had to publish their books under male pseudonyms to be taken seriously, a good example of this were the Brontë sisters. The first print of Wuthering Heights was published under the male pseudonym: Ellis Bell.
One important quote from the chapter was about the position of women and how little Virginia Woolf found in that in a history book:
“Once more I looked up Women, found 'position of' and turned to the pages indicated. 'Wife-beating', I read, 'was a recognized right of man, and was practised without shame by high as well as low…” (A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf)
The next quote showed a great difference between women in literature compared to women in real life:
“Some of the most inspired words, some of the most profound thoughts in literature fall from her lips; in real life she could hardly read, could scarcely spell, and was the property of her husband.” (A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf)
If a woman would have been brave enough to write and publish her writing it would have been under a male pseudonym or, as shown in the following quote, remained unsigned:
“And undoubtedly, I thought, looking at the shelf where there are no plays by women, her work would have gone unsigned.” (A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf)
Lastly the next three quotes caught my eye because they are partly and some in their whole still true to this day.
“That woman, then, who was born with a gift of poetry in the sixteenth century, was an unhappy woman, a woman at strife against herself. All the conditions of her life, all her own instincts, were hostile to the state of mind which is needed to set free whatever is in the brain” (A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf)
“The indifference of the world which Keats and Flaubert and other men of genius have found so hard to bear was in her case not indifference but hostility.” (A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf)
“The history of men's opposition to women's emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.” (A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf)
Trivia question 2:
Virginia Woolf committed suicide.
Seda Ozdemir
VENS3C
Firstly, I strongly believe that Woolf has chosen Judith, “Shakespeare’s sister”, in particular to exaggerate the comparison for it to make sense, especially for the people during that time period. Therefore, with regards to the Elizabethan England it seems obvious for women were limited in their possible profession. Besides that, succeeding in doing anything which was unexpected for a female would be belittled. In short, I thus agree with Woolf on the matter of equality, or better said, at least the concern for women’s rights in practice. Women should not only be a mere presentation of a possession which would set the degree of class among men. Moreover, I find it quite fascinating that this literary ‘essay’ has been the one of the first pieces which have ultimately led to a successful development to the point in which women have a lot more rights today compared to back then.
Zeynep Çabuk (0912821)
VENS3C
I do agree with Woolf’s point of view and the fact that there were hardly any female authors around until the twentieth century.
During the Victorian era, literary art was becoming a big thing, especially for the male writers. However, women had a lot more difficulties than men back then. Within this chapter, Wolf depicts the deep-rooted struggle that a skilled woman endured during this time. For instance, Judith Shakespear was as skilled as her brother, but was unable to develop her talents and was expected to marry just like any other woman.
“Let us suppose that a father from the highest motives did not wish his daughter to leave home and become a writer, painter or scholar. "See what Mr. Oscar Browning says," he would say; and there was not only Mr. Oscar Browning [...] there was an enormous body of masculine opinion to the effect that nothing could be expected of women intellectually.” (3.13)
She ran away to live her life as she wanted but commits suicide at the end. It was a challenging battle for women to establish their dreams. Just like Eliza, a female character in Pygmalion (a play written by George Shaw), who wanted to change her life but had to do this with the help of two men. It was contrary to reason that a young woman like Eliza could achieve her dreams without the help of anyone.
Dalina Mahmood VENS3C
In the Elizabethan era woman were not allowed to enter professions like laws, medicine, novelist, but they could work as maids and cooks. Generally, men were expected to be the breadwinners while women were housewives. In this era women who tried or were novelist, were very limited to achieve something. One reason was, material circumstances made it impossible for a women of Elizabethan era to have financial, social freedom and support. If a woman did try to write and express her thought and feelings, she would have been labelled mad. therefore, men had more opportunities than woman back then.
This is also the case with Shakespeare’s sister, as a child she couldn’t go to school like her brother, instead she did mostly house choirs and was taught very little. She got married to a man who did not treat her right. She got fed up and left him to pursue her dreams in London. She had a lot of difficulties as a woman, she had trouble in finding a stable income, be able to live on her own as a woman and achieve something.
I tried to read this book but it disgusts me so much that I can not make myself read it.
Compulsory reading doesn't work, especially if a book is so damn bad.
Besha Mahmood - VENS3C
I really enjoyed reading this chapter of this book, and I also agree with many point that were made by the writer.
The writer Woolf takes us the reader through the history of female writers. She makes sure that we see how limited and brief the history of female writer are and also why. Woolf reflects on the fact that men historically have composed more work than women. She discovers this when she spends a day in the British Library. Woolf wants to know the reason behind this, in which she sets out to discover.
The idea that men are physically and mentally stronger than women cannot be accepted by Woolf. She believes that there must be a reason for this. The traditional gender roles in history points out that men have more advantages then women for instance: money, space, and education. Women needs a room of her own and money to be able to write.
"A woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction."
When turning to history she finds so little data about the everyday lives of women that she decided to make functional writers. She invents a fictional sister of Shakespeare, names her Judith Shakespeare, and she is equally talented as her brother. Woolf then created a storyline just like that of Shakespeare only her access to the world are blocked because she is a women. This illustrates the reality between women and men at that time perfectly.
All in all, what made this story a piece of art is that she did not end the story with a hate speech towards men, she did not proclaim that women should be more like men and take over their roles. In fact, she rather insists that women should be given equal freedom to develop their own strengths.
Favorite Quote:
"Lock up your libraries if you like; but there is no gate, no lock, and no bolt that you can set upon the freedom of my mind."
Bart Neven Vens3c
Well, women were expected to be good wives for their husbands, to take care of the children and to make sure the house is tidy and clean. It is for this reason that female authors/writers would stay anonymous.
Woolf's point is made very clear. Women were not expected to take up professions and this would not change until the end of world war two. It is in this war that so many men were killed or deployed, so, women were needed to work in the factories and make munitions and so on. (however, this is a bit of trivia)
She invents a character who is equally talented as Shakespeare, however, she experiences way more hardship than her male counterpart. This is because she was no financial and social freedom to express her emotions. This is also because she is a woman.
Melisa Maria VENS3C
Writing wasn’t part of the tasks assigned to women. Women weren’t measured at the same standard as men making it so that their work would never be published and this would discourage women from writing in the first place. I think these women who wanted to break free from these chains used men’s names to be taking serious.
Cornelis van der Klooster VENS2B
Since women weren't expected to follow up on education most were incapable of writing. Along with discouragement of independent thinking meant working in a man's business didn't provide any future. This is why a good question raised by Woolf was if there wouldn't be a (well) known presumed male writer of that era who was actually a woman under a pseudonym.
Tamara Salem - 0920243 - VENS3C
In this day and age, men still have more power than women. It is proven that men make more money than women, for the same type of work. During the Elizabethan era, this was even worse.
The women were not supposed to be an author. It was expected that they'd take of the children, clean and just simply stay at home. I can understand that this is frustrating and women didn't want the world to know they were authors. It thinks that's sad, because I think a lot of talented female writers never got a change to publish a ,possibly great, story.
Bedra Mohamud / 0908880 / VENS3C
Virginia Woolf created the fictional character Judith, who was just as intelligent as her brother William, but had a massive disadvantage in life simply because of her gender.
In this era women were expected to do what was considered ‘female type stuff’ such as cooking, cleaning, taking care of the house and kids etc. Women who tried to break those boundaries and tried achieving success in professional fields were not taken seriously, this includes female authors. Women could write plays, sonnets and create beautiful literary masterpieces, just like men, but unfortunately these would never be published or taken into production for the mere fact that they were not men
Trivia
1. The years of Virginia Woolf's birth and death match James Joyce, an Irish novelist, short story writer, and poet.
2. Virginia Woolf committed suicide.
It can be difficult, when examining past iterations of our society, to link cause and effect between certain historical attitudes. One can easily say that in many cultures, among many periods of time, women as a category have been denied agency; in many cases this would be an understatement. The parallels to modern-day society would be numerous, but more importantly, they’re equally numerous for the Elizabethan era, as several of the literary works we’ve discussed will demonstrate.
In a climate such as we’ve established, one can easily imagine the added difficulties of social standards weighing these authors down. It’s just as easy to imagine an alternative where there were just not that many of them back then, but the Pygmalion-effect suggests that perception affects performance, so it certainly would not have helped.
In short, and as no surprise by now, I stand behind Virginia Woolf’s arguments. And even though she was an early 20th-century writer, even here in the 21st I think we would do well to learn the lessons being taught here.
Yesse
VENS3C
Throughout history, gender inequality has always ben present. Woolf gives a great example of this by creating this fictional character. due to this inequality female writers always had a more difficult time to become a writer, simply because the general public would dismiss the work pure because the author was female. This is where one of the most important sentences and the title derive from.
"A woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction"
She means by this that in order for a woman to become and author she has to be independent, what in that time was difficult to achieve. She had to be independent and have the fundings to undertake something like publishing a book, because society wanted her to be a loyal wife to her husband who would financially take care of her.
This relates to the the strict rules of properness of the Victorian and the Elizabethan era. Women were not supposed to work for themselves. It was their duty to be interesting and pleasant company for the men. Work, and so writing, is not something a lady should be pre-ocupied with.
In more recent time, gender inequality is becoming less and less. There are still many more things wrong, but on the part of writing female writers have almost fully been excepted. One of the best selling books of all time (harry potter) has a female author. Gender equality is not where it needs to be yet, but we re getting closer by the day.
Marieke van Lith - DENS3A
The essay of course focuses on the fact that women in those days were only good for marriage and housework. They were not given a room of their own to explore their own creativity. Even when women were to not marry and explore these creative sides to them, they would not be allowed to work in the theatre if she pleased the way Shakespeare did. I think in those days, women had a different kind of job. Their lives revolved around others. Their husbands, children, community, fellow women around them. They are not entitled to create their own identity and do something for themselves. They would most likely not have any time to write or something else creative.
I don't think I agree with women going insane when their creativity wasn't expressed. Only in a very few cases, could someone be that creative that not expressing this, it would make you go insane. I think if that were the case and Shakespeare's sister was so creative, she would still express that creativity in her mind. Make up stories in her mind, have entire conversations and plays play out in her head while doing laundry. I think they would not know better.
We've seen in stories like Pygmalion and Othello that women are perceived in a way that they are submissive. Eliza throws herself at the feet of these men (ultimately realizing who she could be) to be changed and Othello obviously feels that it's justified to kill his wife because he pleases.
Gaby Roosenburg
VENS3E
Reading books like these makes me realise how lucky I am to be living in the here and now. Back in the Elizabethan age, women held no real significance according to men. They should have become housewives, shouldn't think too much and should mostly just be a good wife by listening to their husbands.Education was far out of reach for women, and if they got any education at all, it was still very basic.
The amount of women who could write could probably have been counted on one hand, and it is only now that they get the recognition they deserve. Woolf's argument is, at some point, that men are better and allowed more. Back in the Elizabethan age that might have held true, but I am glad to see that the gap between equality is every narrowing nowadays.
JULIA KARREMAN DENS3A
Women were, and always will be, the key stone of society. I acknowledge Woolf’s view on the role of women in Shakespeare’s time. The position of women was not equal to that of men. Society wanted an ideal of womanhood in which they had to take on the supporting (and in the background) role in their husbands lives without causing an upheaval. Victorian ideals were reflected in many novels of Virginia Woolf. A woman from Shakespeare’s social class had also no freedom of choice and her path of life was already settle at birth and most of the time her path did not include a good education or learning how to read and write. The willingness and determination of the women who had the drive to put something on paper in those times, are the true leading ladies for us women now in a way.
Claudia Crenshaw DENS3A
“Shakespeare’s sister” symbolizes hidden female creative genius. Woolf explores the idea of a female equivalent to the Bard In order to examine the problems women have faced in the expression of their ideas. These were primarily norms imposed upon women to behave, live and act in a way deemed suitable by society, which was typically male-dominated. None of these norms allowed for a woman to express herself creatively or intellectually. I agree with the author that these restrictions probably made for difficult and unfulfilling lives for many women. Woolf writes that women were often subjects of stories written by men, and in these fictional passages presented in lofty heroic fashion or even dramatically terrible. The author would probably not take issue with this, if it were not for the fact that women are rarely, if ever, represented in any realistic or historic fashion. Women are therefore more than worthy subjects of poetry and painting, but not as independent thinkers or individuals. This may sound extreme, but if we take the example of the books we have read, we can already see that she might very well have a point. None of the authors that we have read so far is a woman. The female characters (to name only a few) we have read about are primarily defined by their relationship to the men in her life. For example, Miss Havisham’s life is stunted by being left by her fiancé, Desdemona is a pawn in Iago’s plot to bring down Othello, and Doris’ life revolves around being Guy’s wife. Aside from this chapter, we have not read what a woman thinks or feels that does not in some sense rely on a desire to be with a man or the suffering she feels from his actions. Woolf would argue, and I would agree, that women are far more complex beings who deserve more recognition in the creation and dissemination of their own ideas.
I truly enjoyed reading chapter 3 of Virginia Woolf’s ‘ A Room of One’s Own’ and was excited to find out that in the past, in 1928 to be precise, a famous female artist asked herself why history knows so very few female artists. What is saddening to realise is that this question is still very relevant today!
I would like to explain myself on a more personal note: I play bass (I work professionally in the Dutch pop, jazz and folk scene) and, being a female musician myself, it strikes me that I hardly meet any other female musicians. Just like Virginia Woolf, I have always wondered why history knows so little female painters, writers, musicians, poets, filmmakers, film- directors etcetera.
To answer this question Woolf first asks herself another important question: ‘what is the state of mind that is most propitious to the act of creation?’(Woolf, chapter 3) She claims that both for men and women ‘all conditions of life are hostile to the state of mind that is needed to set free whatever it is in the brain. Generally material circumstances are against it. Dogs will bark; people will interrupt; money must be made; health will break down’ (Woolf, chapter 3)
All very recognisable indeed! I truly agree with Woolf’s findings that it the patriarchal society, in which women were subordinate to men, which caused so little female artists to thrive. And despite this centuries’ feminism and focus on equal rights it still a fact that there are more successful male artists than female artists, not to mention unequal payment.
When I relate this to the female characters we have been reading about up until now, it’s not hard to find proof for the assertion that it is, and always has been, a ‘man’s world’, as James Brown calls it.
All of the female characters lack the stamina and self assurance to truly follow their hearts and be assertive; Charles Dickens simply depicts his female characters as feeble victims (of abusive fathers or husbands), Oscar Wilde has his ladies ignorantly being fooled by their male counterparts, Shaw’s Eliza actually wants to become a phonetician but gets discouraged by the supercilious Higgins and chooses to get married instead, Tennessee William’s Blanche and Stella both end up as docile and submissive victims of Stanley’s triumphant sturdiness.
I can’t wait to see how the female character evolves in the coming novels on the Literature list! I am suspecting ‘A Room of One’s Own’ to foreshadow a more emancipated depiction!
Bea Viergever DENS3A
For a woman to excel in scholarly craftsmanship such as writing in Tudor and Elizabethan England would have been frowned upon by the predominant male society of that time. Though it is known that Henry the eight’s sixth wife, Catherine Parr, was quite the writer with published works of which ‘prayers or meditations’ was the first. It was still received with a certain resistance mainly due to its religious connotations.
The Elizabethan era is quite interesting as a single woman who delegates men rules the country. However the position of women in society doesn’t evolve similarly. When reading about women in this time period I always feel like they were heroines in their own way, behind closed doors but not less powerful. If we go further in time to the nineteenth century and we review de first publication of Jayne Eyre it is surprising that it was written by the author Curer Bell. We now know that it was Charlotte Bronte who wrote this but felt the novel wouldn’t have been published under her maiden name. The fact that women were forced by society to change their identity to become equal to their male counterparts seems ridiculous and adventurous at the same time. These women are the true founding mothers of feminism we now know. It seems that throughout history a woman’s ability to be equal to men was a fear bigger than the plague as it would have meant a hierarchal imbalance that wasn’t appropriate in men’s society.
Trivia questions of the week:
1. The years of Virginia Woolf's birth and death match exactly with those of which other famous writer? James Joyce.
2. How did Virginia Woolf die? Virginia Woolf died by suicide. She filled her pockets with stones and walked into the river Ouse.
Noor Gudden DENS3A
I agree with Woolf’s arguments. In the Elizabethan era the role of women was to stay at home and take care of her household duties. There were clear distinctions between the rights of men and women, for instance when it came to access to education. Women were not allowed to enter certain libraries, or they needed the company of a men to go in. Women were not expected to write or express themselves in an artistic way. Arts and literature were areas for men and women were not stimulated nor expected to join these ‘clubs’.
On the other hand, the role of women in society was, for the historical era, relatively unconstrained; Spanish and Italian visitors to England commented regularly, and sometimes caustically, on the freedom that women enjoyed in England, in contrast to their home cultures. England had more well-educated upper class women than was common anywhere in Europe (Shapiro, 1977).
Shapiro, S.C. (1977). Feminists in Elizabethan England. History Today. 27 (11): 703–711.
Ed Kraak, DENS3A
During Shakespeare's time, changing social, economic, political, technological and religious factors affected literacy and the practice of writing for both men and women. The advancement of capitalism segregated the private and public spheres of work and home, causing a gendered division of labour in which men left the household to make money, while women (in theory) stayed home to manage the domestic affairs involved in 'huswifery'.
In the story Judith is thwarted in her ambitions to write and 'forced' into traditional roles in which she was expected to “mend the stockings or mind the stew and not moon about with books and papers." In Woolf's view this was the female writer's fate.
I cannot fully agree with Woolf's view. It may be true in general, but Woolf could not have known how many women were actually writing during these centuries, for their works were not generally published. She wasn’t just wrong about how many female writers there were. She was also wrong about the model she proposed for understanding them, which included victimization, oppression and repression. In 2012 the exhibition “Shakespeare’s Sisters: Voices of English and European Women Writers, 1500-1700” showed gathered work of more than 50 female writers from Britain, Italy and France who consistently challenge Woolf’s notion that women were unable to rise above their gender.
While few works are known to have been published by women in England before 1500, over one hundred works were composed or translated by English women between 1500 and 1640. Though this is an impressive increase, it was, of course, a mere fraction of the thousands written by men.
So yes, in general I can support Woolf's view. There is another side to it though.
Trivia:
1. James Joyce
2. Suicide (she drowned herself in the river Ouse)
Women were there to produce babies and to keep the house tidy. Women were not around for their wits, nor were they accepted as a part of the scientific world. Therefore, it was not accepted for women to be writers or anything else close to being academic. And if there happened to be a woman that wanted to defy these unwritten rules, and went ahead to write a play, it would have been no more than normal for the play not to be taken in production or just ignored.
Ercan Yilmaz DEN3A
A room of one’s own:
In that time it would have been much harder for “Shakespeare’s sister” to present herself as a acknowledged writer and to receive the same credits as her “brother”. The fact that Elizabethan era was ruled by Elizabeth herself (a woman...), and that other women had no equal rights whatsoever, does make it sound unfair in a way.
Some interesting quotes:
“It would have been impossible, completely and entirely, for any woman to have written the plays of Shakespeare in the age of Shakespeare”
“Any woman born with a great gift in the sixteenth century would certainly have gone crazed, shot herself, or ended her days in some lonely cottage outside the village, half witch, half wizard, feared and mocked at”
Another interesting quote, one by Charles Dickens caught my attention. “ Women fall into clear categories - they either willingly undertake their `dutiful' domestic duties, very much in line with traditional Victorian values at the time - or rebel against it, and are thus depicted as almost villainous”.
I think these quotes sum it up quite well.
Dagmar Dubois DENS3A
Women have always been the subject of critique when it comes to the roles they have played in society in the past. Translating this to literature and the arts shows us that the woman’s role was often used as a form of entertainment rather than for more intellectual uses. Also, the role of a woman was first and foremost the role of a provider – to literally reproduce life and take care of it. Oftentimes a woman would not be welcome during political discussions and would not be involved in an important decision-making process. Sadly, this is something we still see today in some cultures. When it comes to writing, it cannot come as a surprise that women would sometimes feel the need to use a male pseudonym in order to have something published – a woman’s name would not suffice and was not deemed worthy of being read or published in the first place. This is definitely a recurring theme we have seen in the literary works dealt with in this class. However, throughout history women have proven themselves a resilient people and don’t shy away from fighting for their fundamental rights. And rightfully so…!
I think it's impossible to imagine the role of women back in the days. So I can't say for sure if Woolf's right in the way she describes the struggle for women. On the other hand, we all know that throughout history the position of women in society was always subservient towards men.
Knowing this, the women who does stand out are perfect examples of perseverance and determination in a world dominated by men. And isn't it still the case that women have to work harder than men to achieve the exact same goals?
Of course Woolf is right in her points that there weren’t many female authors around until the 20th century. We all know (I hope so) that the social position of woman throughout history has been one of the lesser person when we compare woman with man. That is, indeed, when we look at what history says. Almost all great heroes in history are man and, just like the heroes, almost all great writers were man. But that doesn’t mean history hasn’t been influenced by woman. Not at all! During my history course I have learned that almost all great men in history were influenced by (their) woman. And the fact that woman didn’t write or got to tell stories doesn’t mean they didn’t influence the main characters in these stories. For example, one of the great emperors of the Roman Empire “Nero” has been brought to power by his mom. I can go on giving examples of great men who we’re influenced by woman but that still doesn’t counter the opinion of Woolf because she is merely talking about underclass woman. And of course in the lower classes I cannot say that all woman influenced their men and in that way they influenced history as well. But on the other hand the quote I leave below is a little to exaggerated if you ask me. The reason many woman didn’t have a room of their own was because their husbands also didn’t have one!
But for women, I thought, looking at the empty shelves, these difficulties were infinitely more formidable. In the first place, to have a room of her own, let alone a quiet room or a sound-proof room, was out of the question, unless her parents were exceptionally rich or very noble, even up to the beginning of the nineteenth century.
Virginia Woolf described multiple difficulties which Shakespeare’s sister would have encountered. For example the difference in upbringing compared to her brother. Also, the fats that she would have been betrothed and arranged to be married at an early age. (And the haplessness accompanied if she would have opposed.) She would not have been able to read a lot of books, not to even mention the impossibility to write herself (without burning or hiding it afterwards). In theatres her ‘genius’ wouldn’t have been welcome either.
To be honest, I find it difficult to try to come up with more reasons. She probably wouldn’t have been able to publish her books in her own name if she would find the money, time and place to write something. How would she even be able to live on her own in that age and country? It would not have been deemed appropriate for her to live by herself or earn her own money.
I find that a lot of Shakespeare’s female characters are well thought of and have multiple layers. On the other hand, most of them do need or crave the attention or structure of a man. For example Desdemona only wants Othello, even he is not exactly treating her right. Both Ophelia and Juliet care the attention and love of respectively Hamlet and Romeo. In Juliet’s case she even swears to denounce her own name, just as Romeo does however. Ophelia however, becomes insane after Hamlet kills her father and drowns mysteriously in a shallow river. Unfortunately, this was eerie similarities with the death of Virginia Woolf who became mad with voices in her head and committed suicide by drowning.
1. Virginia Woolf’s year of birth and death match exactly with those of James Joyce.
2. Virginia Woolf died by drowning herself. She filled her pockets with Stones and walked in to the river Ouse near her home.
Throughout the Elizabethan era, men had more advantages than women.
The roles and characterizations of women during the Elizabethan era were dehumanizing and silencing. Women were recognized as the inferior gender in a male-dominated society. To give an example, Elizabethan women had to learn how to govern a household and become skilled in all housewifely duties. Nevertheless, I read that women were allowed to write works of literature, providing the subject was suitable for women: mainly translations or religious works. But women were not allowed to act on the public stage or write for the public stage. Acting was considered dishonourable for women and women did not appear on the stage in England until the seventeenth century. https://www.elizabethi.org/contents/women/
I agree with Woolf's point of view, in which she states that there were no books, poems or plays written in the Elizabethan era that actually depicted a common woman from the time because their lives had to be so mundane and they had to conform to the societal roles of women at the time.
The fact that Ann Hathaway was less visible than her husband, had of course, not only to do with Shakespeare, but also with the period the women lived in and on how people looked at women at that time.
Post a Comment