Living in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, a woman’s view
This blog post is based on the
book “Breadwinner” by Emma Griffin (Yale University Press 2020). Autobiographies are used as the tool for her
research and her study of them is extensive.
This raises the question about the motivation of the person composing
the autobiography. Does the existence of
the text indicate a level of confidence in writing or educational achievement
on the part of the writer? The author
acknowledges this as a potential difficulty but her analysis of the
autobiographies to which she refers is detailed and she has an enormous data
set (over six hundred) in her study.
Over two hundred of the
autobiographies used in the study were written by women. Women found work outside the home much more
desirable than work within it. Work
outside the home was more likely to bring some degree of financial autonomy,
manifest in the ability to buy clothes and not to accept the clothing and styles
of garments made by their mothers.
Becoming a teacher was an especially sought after profession as it paid
well and required those involved it in being educated themselves. Being “in service” (doing domestic work in
the home of another person or family) was preferable to being at home (as it
was paid) but came with drawbacks such as a harsh employer and the possibility
on unwanted male attention. At home
there was no pay and no choice.
Many young people started work
before they left school. Work was more
desirable than education because of the financial benefits to both the young
man and to his family. Even if a boy was eligible to go to the Grammar School
he frequently would choose not to go (in order to get financial gain in paid
work) and his family would not want him to go because it would prevent him from
earning money to support them. For men
“progress in the work place was rooted in the experience of the work itself”.
Men got some of their earnings
for their own exclusive use (through hot dinners at work or directly as cash
that would not be contributed to the life of the household). Evidence suggests that the more men earned
the more they were likely to keep for themselves. For women marriage was far more than
something spiritual or romantic. It was
a place where there could be economic stability. Household life could be tough, few households
had indoor supplies of water. It was the
cotton areas of northwest England in which households were most likely to have
an indoor tap. The tasks of women
included chipping salt off blocks and banking the fire as well as the cooking,
washing and care of children.
Few women knew anything about sex
and pregnancy at the point of marriage, nor about contraception. The only routes to limit family size were
through abstinence and withdrawal, both of which needed the men to co-operate
(not always guaranteed) yet larger families needed more money to survive. The
provision of money and its use were vital to family life. This is true today, may be the uses of money
have changed? We will see in the next
section on money and can compare nineteenth century lives with our own lives in
the twenty first century.
Comments
Post a Comment