I have read Anne Bradstreet's poem "The Author to Her Book" before and struggled with the message she was trying to convey. I think I found it difficult to relate to her passivity, as a writer, because times are so different now. Women have a lot more freedoms that, as a gender, they didn't have before and are now taken for granted. When I read it this time, about a year after the first time, I read it much differently. I found myself comparing the plight of women writers, like Bradstreet and Margaret Cavendish, to those of African American writer Phyllis Wheatley. In her poem "On Being brought from Africa to America" Wheatley takes a passive, and yet crafty, approach by placing herself in an inferior role but with the ability to be transformed by the influences of the Caucasian race who had claimed themselves to be superior and enlightened when compared to the African American race. Samson Occum, a Native American writer, did the same thing in "A Short Narrative of My Life when he stated that the reason for his troubles was because he was a poor Indian but that it wasn't his fault because God made him that way. This absolved him of responsibility for what he is and spark sympathy from the reader, which would have been mainly white men.
I believe that Bradstreet and Cavendish are another reflection of the era they lived in. Becoming a published, woman writer was not a respected profession for a gender condemned to find complete fulfillment as a wife and mother. A woman was to have no wants of her own or desires apart from her husbands. If Bradstreet or Cavendish had not displayed their writing through a humble, passive, and submissive lens they would have been shunned and most likely never published. Bradstreet describes her own poetry as inferior and flawed. She also implies a lack of control over the outcome of that symbolized inferiority. She portrays herself as a woman incapable of producing any better because she is a woman. Cavendish also takes a similar stance in "An Excuse for So Much Writ upon My Versus." She presents her work as juvenile, incomplete, and in need of guidance. She also appears to absolve herself of all responsibility for her poems outcome in the very first line, "Condemn me not for making such a coil." I don't believe for a second that either of these women actually considered themselves inferior writers; but, instead of screaming "Screw You!!" to the men who controlled their world they chose to play their hand in the most effective way and I applaud and respect them for knowing how to work the system!
I definitely agree that both Bradstreet and Cavendish are reflections of the eras that they lived in. and i think you brought up brilliant points when you brought up the issue of race. I can see where you made the connections between Bradstreet and Wheatley and thought that bringing in the comparison with Occum was really great. I am not sure if our comments are supposed to be 150 words long like our posts are supposed to be, but I don't want to just write a few words for a comment either. Overall, i thought you made great connections in your post and, once again, loved how you tied Bradstreet and Cavendish together with Wheatley and Occum.
ReplyDeleteI like the point made that both of these female writers had to manipulate the system to actually have their work published. Ironically enough, the men of this time period probably took all women's writing literally, when in all reality they were unable to comprehend the tongue-in-cheek nature of the writing. To be able to effectively say what you want to say while being censored is quite an accomplishment, and it is awesome to see that two very intelligent women still have their works studied today. It really is a shame to think about how many great writers could have possibly been lost in the annals of history because they were not a part of the main race, gender, or so on. This is why I really enjoyed both Cavendish and Bradstreet because they really are saying Screw You! to the men who controlled them, but doing so in a way that that many were not even able to condemn them for doing so. In regard to the Wheatley and Occum reference, I am not familiar with either work, but women in the 1600's, just like African Americans and Native Americans, were not white males, so they were viewed as inferior. It's a sad reality to think about, but hey, if not for the racism, sexism, and so on maybe we wouldn't have all these great works.
ReplyDeleteI almost wish that these writers hadn't lived so long ago. At least, I wish that they had written about their writing processes so that we could have a better idea of how they saw themselves as writers. Maybe someday somebody will find Anne Bradstreet's diary and let us know whether she actually did think of her book as the "ill-formed offspring of [her] feeble brain" (1). Maybe such descriptions were a clever ploy; maybe Bradstreet and Cavendish really were a bit insecure about their writings.
ReplyDeleteI very much agree that both Bradstreet and Cavendish are both reflections of the era they lived in. The time they lived in was difficult for women as they were only seen as a wife and mother in society and by publishing pieces they wrote and acknowedging that they can write and write very well, they are saying screw you to society and societal norms of that time. I think it's fascinating to look back and see the changes over the decades and the challenges women writers have faced and ultimately over come.
ReplyDelete