Advertisement

Introduction

  • Angelique Richardson
  • Chris Willis
Chapter

Abstract

From Grant Allen’s The Woman Who Did to Victoria Crosse’s The Woman Who Didn’t, the label ‘New Woman’ signalled new, or newly perceived, forms of femininity which were brought to public attention in the last two decades of the nineteenth century. According to the Westminster Review in 1895:

it is not possible to ride by road or rail, to read a review, a magazine or a newspaper, without being continually reminded of the subject which lady-writers love to call the Woman Question. ‘The Eternal Feminine’, the ‘Revolt of the Daughters,’ the Woman’s Volunteer Movement, Women’s Clubs, are significant expressions a effective landmarks.1

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    A. G. P. Sykes, ‘The Evolution of the Sex’, Westminster Review 143 (1895), 396–400.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ann Ardis, New Women, New Novels: Feminism and Early Modernism ( New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990 ), 4.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    See Malmgreen, ‘Women’s Suffrage in England: Origins and Alternatives, 1792–1851’ (MA diss., University of Hull, 1975), 25Google Scholar
  4. Barbara Taylor, Eve and the New Jerusalem (London: Virago, 1983)Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (published with John Stuart Mill, The Subjection of Women) (London: J. M. Dent, 1985), 154, 163, 168.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    See also Gagnier, The Insatiability of Human Wants: Economics and Aesthetics in Market Society (Chicago University Press, 2000), esp. chapters 2 and 5; Gagnier notes that by the time of Olive Schreiner’s Woman and Labour (1911) the idea of progress had become biologized, and hence narrower: progress for all was no longer considered an option.Google Scholar
  7. Richard K. P. Pankhurst, William Thompson, 1775–1833: Britain’s Pioneer Socialist, Feminist and Co-Operator (London: Watts, 1954). As Taylor notes, the book was written largely to refute James Mill’s argument that female enfranchisement was unnecessary because the political interests of women were ‘contained’ in those of their fathers and husbands, and constituted a sustained critique of the bourgeois liberal assumptions on which James Mill’s case had been based (Taylor, chapter 1).Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Judith Worsnop, ‘A reevaluation of “the problem of surplus women” in 19th-century England: the case of the 1851 Census’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 13 (1990), 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Philippa Levine, ‘“So Few Prizes and So Many Blanks”: Marriage and Feminism in later Nineteenth-Century England’, Journal of British Studies 28 (1992)Google Scholar
  10. Mary Lyndon Shanley, Feminism, Marriage and the Law in Victorian England, 1850–1895 ( London: I. B. Tauris, 1989 ).Google Scholar
  11. 8.
    Richard J. Evans, The Feminists: Women’s Emancipation Movements in Europe, America and Australasia, 1840–1920 (London: Croom Helm; New York: Barnes & Noble, 1977 ), 64.Google Scholar
  12. Patricia Hollis, Women in Public: The Women’s Movement, 1850–1900 (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1979, reprinted 1981);Google Scholar
  13. Philippa Levine, Feminist Lives in Victorian England: Private Roles and Public Commitment ( Basil Blackwell: Oxford, 1990 );Google Scholar
  14. Barbara Caine, Victorian Feminists ( Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992 );Google Scholar
  15. Martha Vicinus, Independent Women: Work and Community for Single Women 1850–1920 ( London: Virago, 1985 ).Google Scholar
  16. 10.
    See Gertrude Himmelfarb, introduction to On Liberty (1859; Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1985), 16. In his Autobiography (ed. A. O. J. Cockshut) (written 1854–1870; first published in 1873; Halifax: Ryburn Publishing, 1992 )Google Scholar
  17. J. S. Mill charts his recognition of the inadequacy of the Utilitarian formula ‘the greatest happiness of the greatest number’ which his father had espoused so tenaciously (77–8).Google Scholar
  18. 11.
    John Stuart Mill, On the Subjection of Women (1869; London: J. M. Dent, 1929), 232, 238.Google Scholar
  19. Amos Shanley, ‘The Subjection of Women’, Westminster Review (1870), 63; for discussion of Mill in relation to nineteenth- and twentieth-century feminists, see Richardson, ‘Biology and Feminism’, Critical Quarterly 2000.Google Scholar
  20. 13.
    See Carol Dyhouse, Girls Growing Up in Late Victorian and Edwardian England (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; Boston, Mass., Broadway House, 1981 );Google Scholar
  21. Felicity Hunt (ed.), Lessons for Life, the Schooling of Girls and Women, 1850–1950 ( Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987 );Google Scholar
  22. Joan Burstyn, Victorian Education and the Ideal of Womanhood ( London: Croom Helm, 1980 );Google Scholar
  23. Jane McDermid, ‘Women and Education’, in Jane Purvis (ed.), Women’s History in Britain, 1850–1945 ( London: UCL Press, 1995 ).Google Scholar
  24. Dyhouse, No Distinction of Sex? Women in British Universities 1870–1939 ( London: UCL Press, 1995 ).Google Scholar
  25. 15.
    Eliza Lynn Linton, ‘The Judicial Shock to Marriage’, Nineteenth Century 171 (1891), 700.Google Scholar
  26. 16.
    Maeve E. Doggett, Marriage, Wife-Beating and the Law in Victorian England (Columbia, SC: South Carolina University Press, 1993)Google Scholar
  27. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England 4 vols ( 1765–9; London: Strahan, 1829 );Google Scholar
  28. See also L. I., The Lavves Resolution of Women’s Rights ( London: Printed for John More, 1632 ).Google Scholar
  29. James C. Mohr, ‘Feminism and the History of Marital Law: Basch and Stetson on the Rights of Wives’, American Bar Foundation Research Journal (1984);Google Scholar
  30. Susan Staves, ‘Where is History but in Texts? Reading the History of Marriage’, in John M. Wallace (ed.), The Golden and the Brazen World: Papers in History and Literature ( Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985 );Google Scholar
  31. Carole Pateman, ‘“God Hath Ordained to man a Helper”: Hobbes, Patriarchy and Conjugal Right’, in Mary Lyndon Shanley and Carole Pateman (eds), Feminist Interpretations and Political Theory ( Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991 ).Google Scholar
  32. John Fraser MacQueen, The Rights and Liabilities of Husband and Wife ( 1849; London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1905 );Google Scholar
  33. Harriet Taylor Mill, ‘Enfranchisement of Women’, Westminster Review 55 (1851);Google Scholar
  34. Harriet Taylor Mill, ‘The Laws Relating to Women’, Law Review (20–21) (1854–5);Google Scholar
  35. Margaret Oliphant, ‘The Laws Concerning Women’, Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine 79 (1856)Google Scholar
  36. Margaret Oliphant, ‘The Condition of Women’, Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine 83 (1858);Google Scholar
  37. Margaret Oliphant, ‘The Laws of Marriage and Divorce’, Westminster Review 82 (1864);Google Scholar
  38. Alfred Dewes, ‘The Injustice of the English Law as it Bears on the Relationship of Husband and Wife’, Contemporary Review (1868);Google Scholar
  39. Louisa Catherine Shore, ‘The Emancipation of Women’, Westminster Review (1874);Google Scholar
  40. Frances Cobbe, ‘Wife-Torture in England’, Contemporary Review 32 (1878);Google Scholar
  41. Courtney Stanhope Jenny, The History of the Law of England as to the Effects of Marriage on Property and on the Wife’s Legal Capacity ( London: Reeves & Turner, 1879 );Google Scholar
  42. John Williams Edwards and William Frederick Hamilton, The Law of Husband and Wife ( London: Butterworths, 1883 );Google Scholar
  43. Montague Lush, The Law of Husband and Wife within the Jurisdiction of the Queen’s Bench and Chancery Divisions ( London: Stevens, 1884 );Google Scholar
  44. William Pinder Eversely, The Law of Domestic Relations ( London: Stevens and Haynes, 1885 );Google Scholar
  45. William Pinder Eversely, ‘The Law in Relation to Women’, Westminster Review 128 (1887);Google Scholar
  46. William Pinder Eversely, ‘The Personal Liberty of Married Women’, Law Times 90 (1890–1);Google Scholar
  47. William Pinder Eversely, ‘Personal Relations of Husband and Wife’, Justice of the Peace 55 (1891);Google Scholar
  48. Matilda Blake, ‘Are Women Protected?’, Westminster Review 137 (1892)Google Scholar
  49. Matilda Blake, ‘The Lady and the Law’, Westminster Review 137 (1892);Google Scholar
  50. Joseph Bridges Matthews, A Manual of the Law Relating to Married Women ( London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1892 );Google Scholar
  51. J. De Montmorency, ‘The Changing Status of a Married Woman’, Law Quarterly Review 13 (1897);Google Scholar
  52. A. V. Dicey, Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England during the Nineteenth Century ( 1905; London: Macmillan, 1962 ).Google Scholar
  53. see Thomas Hardy, The Mayor of Casterbridge (1886), The Woodlanders (1887) and Jude the Obscure (1895).Google Scholar
  54. 18.
    See Richardson, ‘The Eugenization of Love: Sarah Grand and the Morality of Genealogy, Victorian Studies (Winter 1999/2000), 227–55Google Scholar
  55. 23.
    Mrs M. Eastwood, ‘The New Woman in Fiction and in Fact’, Humanitarian 5 (1894), 375–9.Google Scholar
  56. 24.
    Gail Cunningham, The New Woman and the Victorian Novel ( London, Macmillan, 1978 );CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Penny Boumelha, Thomas Hardy and Women: Sexual Ideology and Narrative Form ( Brighton: Harvester Press, 1982 );Google Scholar
  58. Ann L. Ardis, New Women, New Novels: Feminism and Early Modernism ( New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990 );Google Scholar
  59. Lyn Pykett, The ‘Improper’ Feminine: the Women’s Sensation Novel and the New Woman Writing ( London and New York: Routledge, 1992 );CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sally Ledger, The New Woman: Fiction and Feminism at the Fin de Siècle ( Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997 );Google Scholar
  61. Teresa Mangum, Married, Middlebrow, and Militant: Sarah Grand amid the New Woman Novel ( Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1999 );Google Scholar
  62. Ann Heilmann, The Late-Victorian Marriage Question: a Collection of Key New Woman Texts ( London: Routledge Thoemmes Press, 1998 ).Google Scholar
  63. Carolyn Burdett, Olive Schreiner and the Progress of Feminism: Evolution, Gender, Nation (London: Macmillan, 2000)Google Scholar
  64. Ann Heilmann, New Woman Fiction (London: Macmillan, 2000) and New Woman Strategies: Sarah Grand, Olive Schreiner, Mona Caird (Manchester University Press, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  65. 25.
    Sarah Grand: ‘The New Woman and the Old’, Lady’s Realm (1898), 466.Google Scholar
  66. 27.
    Patricia Marks: Bicycles, Bangs and Bloomers: the New Woman in the Popular Press ( Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1990 ), 205.Google Scholar
  67. 29.
    Corelli, The Sorrows of Satan ( 1895; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996 ), 178.Google Scholar
  68. 31.
    Elizabeth Rachel Chapman, foreword to Marriage Questions in Modern Fiction (London, 1897), xiii.Google Scholar
  69. 33.
    Juliet Gardiner, introduction to The New Woman ( London: Collins & Brown, 1993 ), 3–4.Google Scholar
  70. 34.
    H. G. Wells, Ann Veronica ( London: Ernest Benn, 1927 ), 27.Google Scholar
  71. 35.
    Margaret Oliphant, ‘The Anti-Marriage League’, Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine (1896), 135–49.Google Scholar
  72. 36.
    Sarah Grand: ‘The Woman’s Question’, The Humanitarian, March 1886, quoted in Elaine Showalter: Sexual Anarchy: Gender and Culture at the Fin de Siècle (Virago, 1992), 52.Google Scholar
  73. 37.
    M. G. Fawcett: ‘The Woman Who Did’, Contemporary Review (1895), 625–63Google Scholar
  74. Elaine Showalter, A Literature of Their Own (Virago, 1979, reprinted 1988), 52Google Scholar
  75. Sarah Wintle, introduction to The Woman Who Did (1895; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995 ), 1.Google Scholar
  76. 38.
    Sally Alexander: Becoming a Woman ( London: Virago, 1994 ), 63.Google Scholar
  77. 40.
    Meg Gomersall, Working-Class Girls in C19th England: Life, Work and Schooling (London: Macmillan, and New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997 );CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Sally Alexander, ‘Women’s Work in Nineteenth-Century London: a study of the years 1820–1850’Google Scholar
  79. D. Thompson, ‘Women and Nineteenth-Century Radical Politics: a lost dimension’, in J. Mitchell and A. Oakley (eds), The Rights and Wrongs of Women ( Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1976 ), 59–111;Google Scholar
  80. J. Lown, Women and Industrialization: Gender at Work in Nineteenth-Century England ( Cambridge, Polity, 1990 );Google Scholar
  81. Angela V. John (ed.), Unequal Opportunities: Women’s Employment in England 1800–1918 ( Oxford, Blackwell, 1986 );Google Scholar
  82. Eddy Higgs, ‘Women, Occupations and Work in Nineteenth-Century Censuses’, History Workshop Journal 23 (1987), 59–79;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. June Purvis, ‘Women’s Life is essentially Domestic, Public Life being Confined to Men’ (Comte): separate spheres and inequality in the education of working-class women, 1854–1900’, History of Education 10 (1981), 227–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. June Purvis, Hard Lessons: the Lives and Education of Working-Class Women in Nineteenth-Century England ( Cambridge: Polity, 1989 );Google Scholar
  85. Elizabeth Roberts, A Woman’s Place: an Oral History of Working-Class Women, 1890–1940 ( Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984 );Google Scholar
  86. Sonya O. Rose, ‘Gender at Work: sex, class and industrial capitalism’, History Workshop Journal 21 (1986), 113–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Sonya O. Rose, Limited Livelihoods: Gender and Class in Nineteenth-Century England ( London: Routledge, 1992 ).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 41.
    See Hal Draper and Anne G. Lipow, ‘Marxist Women versus Bourgeois Feminism’, The Socialist Register (1976), 224.Google Scholar
  89. 42.
    Sally Alexander, Becoming a Woman ( London: Virago, 1994 ), 129–31.Google Scholar
  90. 43.
    Sheila Jeffreys, The Spinster and Her Enemies: Feminism and Sexuality 1880–1930 (London: Pandora Press, 1985), 60 and n. 19, National Vigilance Committee Minutes, 3 January 1889.Google Scholar
  91. 44.
    James Eli Adams, ‘Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Nature and the Feminine in Tennyson and Darwin’, Victorian Studies 33:1(1989); reprinted in Rebecca Stott (ed.), Tennyson ( Harlow: Longman, 1996 ), 87–111.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angelique Richardson
  • Chris Willis

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations