Comparing Themes in Charlotte and Ruth Hall Essay

Women, especially were inclined to be criticized or ostracized if they did not follow society’s gender roles. They were thought to be mothers and the main caretakers of the family. At the time, women were seen as delicate and feminine. Their work was found in the house with domestic duties. Charlotte Temple, by Susanna Rowson describes the ideal women and was specifically targeted to “factory girls” who left their homes in the farms to work in the city (Rowson, xii). Mrs. Temple, Charlotte Temple’s mother, decided not to let her grief consume her and instead focused on making her husband happy and taking care of her father after Charlotte left (Rowson, 56). If a woman was not committed to one man, then she was not the ideal woman. Mademoiselle La Rue, Charlotte’s teacher, was far from a role model. She was scandalous because she “eloped from a convent with a young officer” and she even had to hide it to get a job at the school (Rowson, 26). Moreover, women with no financial fortune were unfit to marry. Marriage was a financial transaction and a man’s success required that he married someone wealthy. Montraville’s father explains to his son that he would be happy if his son were to marry a woman with a fortune, but if he was to marry a woman with no fortune he’d be sticking her into the evils of a small income with a potential

She begins the story an unfaithful hot mess, and she ends the story an unfaithful hot mess. The only thing that changes is her last name and location, but one could wager that she remains an unfaithful hot mess for the rest of her life, with nobody expecting her to be different because “Charlotte was unusual” (Smith 274). With no reason to change, and no crucible to go through, Charlotte at the end of the story remains as tempestuous and flawed as she was at the beginning. She receives no repercussions for her actions, her boyfriend returns to make her a wife, even after it is revealed that she had been cheating on him with two people. Of course, Maurice wasn’t as faithful as he promised he would be either, but Charlotte seems unperturbed by it. Shame doesn’t touch her, and she goes through no trials other than everyone loving her regardless of her myriad flaws simply because she wears her hair a certain way. The worst thing that happens to her in the story, objectively, is that she loses her trademarked bangs, and even then it doesn’t matter, because hair will grow back, and she will have learned

In the 21st century, many women, myself included, take for granted that we can wear whatever we desire and say what we want, in public, without the fear of being thrown in jail. However, that was not always the case. While the fight for the continued advance of women’s rights rages on, women of the 19th century lived a very different life than the one, us women, lead today. The feminist agenda was just emerging on the horizon. One particular woman was preparing to do her part to further the cause of women’s rights: Sarah Willis Parker. Parker was better known by her pen name, Fanny Fern. After facing and overcoming extreme adversity, she made the decision to start writing. To understand how truly ground breaking Fanny Fern was, we need to understand that in a 1997 edition of an anthology of American satire from colonial times to present, Fern was the only woman writer from the 19th century in that text. Her satiric style and controversial subject matter was just what the oppressed needed to gain some support and give them a voice.

Throughout American Literature, women have been depicted in many different ways. The portrayal of women in American Literature is often influenced by an author's personal experience or a frequent societal stereotype of women and their position. Often times, male authors interpret society’s views of women in a completely different nature than a female author would. While F. Scott Fitzgerald may represent his main female character as a victim in the 1920’s, Zora Neale Hurston portrays hers as a strong, free-spirited, and independent woman only a decade later in the 1930’s.

In 1854 Fanny Fern published what was to become not only her most successful works, but one of the most popular and enduring works of English literature during the Antebellum period: Ruth Hall; A Domestic Tale of the Present Time. Though the title – especially to a modern reader – does little to convey the level of thoughtful and heady critique that Fern expounds through this book, it is actually is a strong indictment of the feminine position as the subordinate housewife, mother, and societal agent. However, despite this criticism, it does not seem that Fanny Fern is critical of the institutions of marriage or motherhood as a whole. Her critique is based on the limiting effects of the conventional roles into which wives and mothers fall, and the deleterious consequences these roles have on the personal development and self-actualization of the women who enter into them. Therefore, it is not the institution of marriage or motherhood that Fern is critical of, but rather the expectations and limitations that society assigns to the women who assume these roles.

Women in the nineteenth century, for the most part, had to follow the common role presented to them by society. This role can be summed up by what historians call the “cult of domesticity”. The McGuffey Readers does a successful job at illustrating the women’s role in society. Women that took part in the overland trail as described in “Women’s Diaries of the Westward Journey” had to try to follow these roles while facing many challenges that made it very difficult to do so.

Two-hundred years is a sizeable gap of time that allows plenty of room for change. American society had been rapidly changing from the early seventeenth century to the late nineteenth century, but despite this, the roles and rights of women have remained locked in place. There were many factors to consider as to why women were not allowed to flourish in their time and exceed these boundaries, and while some accepted it, there were many that opposed and faced these difficulties head on. Two female authors, one from colonial times, and one from nineteenth century America, have written about the obstacles and misogyny they’ve overcome in a male dominated literary career. Despite the two-hundred-year gap between the lives of Margaret Fuller and Anne Bradstreet, they both face issues regarding the static stereotype that women are literarily inferior and subservient handmaids to men.

Throughout the life of an individual, their perspective will often be altered by significant influences that they are surrounded by. These influences, many times contradicting, are always people or things that are important to that person. In “The Metaphor”, Budge Wilson, using character development, portrays the idea that even though most of a person's perspective is altered by long lasting influences, the most significant change in perspective comes from the influences that are most important and meaningful to the him/her. During “The Metaphor”, Charlotte starts out as a unique individual, but slowly changes and conforms to what her mom and peers expect her to be, however, in the end she throws that all aside because of an important person

The complete transformation continues after she is abandoned, and as “once an object of desire”, Charlotte’s “emaciated appearance” enables her from being valuable in any way, as the main purpose for her capture, pleasure, is unable to be satisfied (76). The connection between Charlotte’s corporeal appearance to the society's culture and ideology, solidify the depletion of her worth throughout her stay in America. She is seen as an “object” of “desire” and with no appeal left, she is of no use to the men in the novel. Rowson’s final depiction of Charlotte’s loss of self reflects in her pregnancy and how the unborn child becomes an “innocent witness” and physical image of her worth and “heir to […] shame” (62). The body is bought for nothing and so is worth nothing to be respected and acknowledged. Charlotte is detached from humanity at the hands of others and is merely an object to be used when one

Neither Maurice nor the narrator has any idea of the affairs. Despite these horrible actions from Charlotte, the love towards her from Maurice and the narrator was still immense. True obsession seeps through the irony in this devastating

Mary Rowlandson and Anne Bradstreet were the two most famous women authors from this period. During this time, women were supposed to be silent, but that did not stop Rowlandson from writing this narrataive (Davis 50). For a woman to be able to write and publish a work, they had to meet certain conditions. Cotton Mather wrote Ornaments for the Daughters of Zion, which explained these conditions for women authors. Davis sums up Mather’s thoughts on women writing by saying, “The key to acceptable writing for women seems to be that these acts are commended by their virtue and therefore ‘without sin’” (49).

American Literature has always been about men and for men. In this essay, we are going to analyze the women’s role in the book, as inferior and weaker gender.

One of the most widely discussed themes of Jewett’s writing is her depiction of feminism. Her works are some of the earliest examples of literary feminism, and so hold a great significance in the study of historical feminism. It should be said that Jewett’s, and by extension, everyone in the 19th century’s idea of feminism is most likely not the same as our modern, 21st century definition of feminism. Instead of focusing on women’s suffrage or equal rights, Jewett’s feminist writing takes a vastly different approach by simply depicting women as deeply complex, fleshed-out characters. Miss Dobin and Miss Lucinda Dobin from “The Dulham Ladies” are excellent examples of this. The main story describes two women who are arrogant and stuck-up in

An example of this notion is shown in Hope Leslie when Governor Winthrop, the landlord, reacts to Hope, the tenant, coming home late and refuses to reveal her reason why: “...Winthrop was not accustomed to have his inquisitorial rights resisted by those in his own household, and he was more struck than pleased by Hope’s moral courage” (184). Evidently, Winthrop’s reaction proves that women with “moral courage” are unladylike because moral courage is a manly trait. On the other hand, Esther Downing, another character in Hope Leslie, embodies the cult of true womanhood. Esther’s mere look at her love interest Everell is described as “a look of...pleased dependence, which is natural... and which men like to inspire, because --perhaps -- it seems to them an instinctive tribute to their natural superiority” (219). So, “Esther’s look … of dependence” confirms that the expectation that all women are supposed to have the same behavior, gestures and personality is meant to not only please men but to also hide their true form. Therefore, the cult of true womanhood presents an internal battle in female writers and Sedgwick presents this womanly struggle through the contrast between Hope and Esther. Society wants women to be quaint housewives but publishing a book defies the cult of true womanhood. Thus, defying the qualities rooted in the cult of true womanhood causes high risk of

Little Women considers the place of women in society by presenting the portraiture of several very different but equally praiseworthy women. As we read the novel, we experience their different interpretations of femininity, and we see a range of different possibilities for incorporating women into society. Because the novel was written in the mid-nineteenth century, historical setting places limits on what women can do. However, modern readers may be pleasantly astonished by the novel 's tendency to push the boundaries of women 's traditional roles. This book insists that women have a great deal to contribute, certainly to the home and domestic sphere, but also to literature, art, and an honorable society.