Mary Donovan Hapgood was truly a woman who could do it all. Her works throughout the years extended into a multitude of topics and themes. She stood beside the Italian immigrants Sacco and Vanzetti for seven years in their brutal struggle with the law. Hapgood not only wrote her ideas on paper for all to see, but she lived them for all to experience. Throughout her account of her time with Sacco and Vanzetti, the audience begins to lose count on just how many times Hapgood discloses she was arrested or had an altercation with the law. While her work and dedication to the Sacco and Vanzetti case may be arguably her biggest work, Hapgood had more in her to say than what she got across with these two men. Her writings transcend genres and play with the manipulation to audience construction, appeals to pathos, and many more in her other works. When looking at Hapgood, it is a disservice to solely look at her more public work; in fact, much of her true feelings on the woman’s role in socialist reform may actually lie in her more private works.
Hapgood truly exposes her view on the role of women in the socialist reform that was becoming so prevalent in certain areas of work. Focusing on the relation between Big Tim and his daughter, Nellie, the text takes on a narrative approach that focuses on the idea of the audience as one that needs to be told a story to. There is a feeling of back-and-forth that truly inspires when the text is through. The narrative starts out with Nellie in a very classic woman’s role, the domestic. Hapgood even goes so far as to claim that “the comfort of her father was Nellie’s main interest in life….” (1). At first, this appears to be the antithesis of feminism. All that was being worked for at the time of this publication seems to be squandered in this one point. However, as the text progresses, Hapgood shows the audience that there is more in socialism than strict gender roles. After Nellie’s pregnancy, Big Tim takes over as domestic goddess, and he puts all his funds that remain from the strike into Nellie’s recovery. Clearly, as Big Tim takes care of his daughter, it is exposed that the woman’s role in socialism is variable. She must do her part, but all are in this struggle together. If Big Tim loses Nellie, he loses himself. The sense of community allows gender stereotypes to be broken down for the benefit of the group on the whole.
Again, Hapgood openly talks about what she thinks of the role of women is in her time, although within this text she does not solely focus on the socialist reform. Talking more of an orator stance, Hapgood truly uses this essay to discuss her somewhat fluid and changing thoughts on just what a woman should be. Starting with a strong nod to the domestic, Hapgood openly says: “Even in New England, I am what is considered a good housekeeper. To me the sight rows of currant jelly reddening in the afternoon sun—the clean, white family-washing whipping in the wind on a bright spring day…all bring me great joy and satisfaction in the accomplishment of worthwhile tasks” (1). She even includes a section within her text talking about how her daughter solely desires domestic lifestyle. However, perhaps using this thought about the youth of the world being stuck in past ideologies as a springboard for her viewpoints, Hapgood expresses how she is “also interested in other things—not in women’s clubs, I refuse to be segregated. I am oppose to Jim Crowism for colored people or for women’” (2). Taking this idea of non-segregation further, Hapgood claims that women should not be expected to do better than men in politics and that all should be allowed to “muddle” together. Clearly, infusing her socialist ideologies into her views on women’s rights, Hapgood makes strong claims for the necessity that men and women are one, and act united. Being united should never include appeasing the husband, or acting below him. Women must me independent within their marriage, but must also act in accordance with their husband. Hapgood truly walks a path right down the middle of the feminist ideals by neither taking an extremely liberal or conservative view on the topic. Instead, she takes a socialist view.
Focusing more on exposing the injustices the working class experiences day in and day out, Hapgood again adapts the idea of the audience as one that should be told a story, and works to inspire change through an extremely well honed sense of pathos. Taking a simpler style and using animals as characters, Hapgood truly sets this essay up as a children’s story. It is as if she works to expose the youth of the nation to the harshness that the world has to offer them; she looks to the future for change. Because it is set up as such, Hapgood lacks subtlety in her devices, mainly focusing on en elicitation of pathos from the audience to amend the wrongs that she is pointing out. Hapgood openly states many of her points about the harshness of the mines and the poor treatment of laborers: “It seemed to Jerry that no matter how hard a mule worked some drivers were never satisfied” (4). She even openly shows the animals’ form of strike: “Bird…refused to draw more than three cars at any time. When she was given too heavy a load, she would look back, count the cars, and make her decision. She refused to move. When threatened with violence she kicked and jumped, even hitting the roof with her tow hind feet, but she would not go forward”(5). While this may all seem simple, it is still effective. It allows for children and adults alike to see the injustices in a way that truly inspires change. This may not be Hapgood’s most refined text, but it does not mean that it does not still include spirit and ideas for change.
Within this text, Hapgood elaborates more on the qualities that she feels we all must have to be effective in social reform and protest. The essay serves as a sort of “how to” guide and puts an emphasis on the three basic qualities that all must have: daring, defiance, and fortitude. These three elements lead to courage, which can lead to socialist reform. Hapgood may be the least focused on techniques and audience construction within this essay as she focuses more on the people who have shaped her to have these feelings and believe in what she does. Later on in the text, Hapgood scolds industry for crushing individuality saying: “Industrial conditions are perhaps the most destructive of individuality…Here is the best opportunity to crush the individual who raises his head above the herd” (1). Her ideals come off as very cut and dry socialism within this essay. She rallies her troops and gets ready for any advancement in the near future.
A culmination of all the techniques and ideals that she has already demonstrated, No Tears for My Youth may be Hapgood’s most striking piece of work. It focuses on the need for basic human rights and makes use of extreme pathos in order to show the audience the need for basic goodness in life. I choose not to discuss it too much further here, as it will be the focus of my next phase as I explore related material to the Sacco and Vanzetti trial.
1 comment:
I thought your analysis of "Big Tim's Daughter" was interesting. I also chose to study Mary Hapgood's works, and I had come up with a different interpretation that focused more on her involvement with the Union groups. I liked how you linked the idea of socialism with that of breaking stereotypes and the issue of sex vs. gender. I wondered to myself, while reading the story, why Hapgood included the bit about Nellie's son. She talks about how he is naughty and badly behaved, and talks about all the (cruel) methods with which his uncle subjugated him. Why do you think she chose to include this? What is its role? What does it tell us about women's role in society and socialism?
Post a Comment