Phase One:
Upon my discovery process at the Lilly, I dug through a couple of documents on Victorian Women. Initially I was confused as to what exactly I was supposed to be looking for, so I just flipped through chapters of Ellen Barlee’s works including Our Homeless Poor and Friendless and Helpless. However, after researching afterwards about the Victorian time era, women’s place in society during the Victorian era, and Victorian morality, points of interest began to form in relation to Barlee’s works. Our Homeless Poor and Friendless and Helpless were written in compliance to the issue of injustice and unfairness of the life of poverty ridden citizens and recognizing women’s nonexistence in the working class.
The values of the Victorians can be classed under Religion, Morality, Elitism, Industrialism and Improvement, all aspects Barlee highlighted in both works. The texts were to be used as a tool to help women envision and empathize the lives of poor citizens in the Victorian era. The first chapter of Friendless and Helpless is titled “Pauperism”. The acknowledgment of the poor and the urge to be good and Christian bring a type of “Robin Hood” attitude towards the wealthy. It is among the societal duties of Victorian women to be pure as a Saint and what better way to be seen as a Saint than to act like one? She claims that the poverty in England, a “Christian Country” was utterly uncalled for. This goes with the expectations from the Church and the oppression gender standards for women in the 19th century.
I am curious and wonder why Queen Victoria would bind women so strictly with laws and societal demands upon the female gender. Why would a women who held untold amounts of power and influence not use that to assist the destruction of oppression against women in society? It is obvious in Barlee's works that the women were opressed in society by not being able to hold jobs and also by the lack of rights they held.
2 comments:
Ariel,
I think this is a really nice introduction to Queen Victoria. I think it's interesting how she was upset by the poverty she saw her citizen's living in. There seems to be a relation between morality and poverty. I would like to know more about that.
I think that there is an opportunity to compare and contrast the ideals of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth. It sounds like they had many different thoughts on what gender should be. What would be different between the two? I'm also interested in knowing more about the Victorian era in general. What we they like? What did they do? How do they compare to today's women? What makes them different?
I think you have sparked my interest in Queen Victoria and her era. I know very little about this subject but I think it would be interesting to learn more about.
Without being much of a history buff, I'm intrigued by what you have pointed out here. I'm thoroughly surprised to learn that Queen Victoria was so interested in provoking women about poverty since she, of course was royalty- at the opposite end of the social ladder.
So to tie your question of why she didn't use her power to "assist...destruction" back to what you claimed earlier in your post, the queen must have really wanted to be viewed as a Saint. Being looked upon as saintly must have held a power beyond what she had then as a queen.
I must say that you have really got me here. I would like to learn more about this Victorian era and can't wait to hear more!
Post a Comment