[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.�John�Faucheraud�Grimk�was�a�successful�Charlestonian�lawyer�and�one�time�South�Carolinian�legislator,�and�his�son�Thomas�followed�his�father's�vocation�as�a�lawyer�in�the�Cheves's�law�firm.�And�finally,�all�three�most�certainly�flirted�in�the�same�social,�political,�and�intellectual�circles�of�antebellum�Charleston,�no�doubt�even�playing�the�role�of�belle�at�the�same�Southern�cotillions�during�their�coming�out�years.�And�yet�they�also�shared�something�much�more�profound�than�Charleston,�camellias,�and�coquetry,�for�in�their�writings�on�the�subject�of�slavery�was�inextricably�bound�up�the�question�of�gender�and�the�respective�positions�of�male�and�female.Few�scholars�of�the�antebellum�South,�and�of�the�peculiar�institution�in�particular,�have�paid�adequate�attention�to�the�gendered�dimensions�of�proslavery�thought.�2�Yet�in�the�words�of�historian�Stephanie�McCurry,�"the�subordination�of�women�bore�a�great�deal�of�the�ideological�weight�of�slavery."3�That�the�subsumed�status�of�women�in�the�private�sphere�of�the�plantation�household�could�bear�any�relationship�to�the�public�world�of�Southern�slavery�politics�may�appear�problematic�to�those�who�still�hold�to�a�rigid�distinction�between�the�personal�and�the�political,�the�private�and�the�public.�Yet�as�historian�Joan�W.�Scott�has�noted,�"The�public�private�distinction families�as�compared�to�the�nation,�mother's�needs�versus�the�needs�of�the�state�.�.�.�is�critical�in�the�formulation�of�nationalist�or�patriotic�ideologies.�To�what�extent�these�ideologies�also�rest�on�and�reinscribe�existing�notions�of�gender�relationships�and�the�sexual�division�of�labor�remains�an�important and�as�yet�unstudied question."4In�the�attempt�of�the�Old�South's�ideologues�to�bring�into�being�just�such�a�regionally�conscious�weltanschauung�(and�in�the�North's�attempts�to�extinguish�such�an�ideology),�it�was�precisely�the�politics�of�the�so�called�private,�gendered,�and�racial�that�so�fiercely�animated�public�debate�both�within�and�between�both�sides�of�the�Mason�Dixon�line.�As�a�consequence,�in�the�South,�the�circumscribed�borders�of�conventional�gender�relations�were�as�fiercely�patrolled�as�the�plantation's�slave�quarters~�while�in�the�North,�in�spite�of�an�emerging�discourse�on�the�contested�status�of�middle�class�women,�none�but�the�most�radical�Garrisonian�abolitionists�were�prepared�to�make�common�cause�with�a�nascent�woman's�rights�movement.�Not�surprisingly,�then,�it�was�not�just�the�proslavery�argument�of�Southern�ideologues�that�tended�to�coalesce�around�the�axis�of�gendered�difference,�but�the�rhetoric�of�the�North's�abolitionist�feminists�as�well,�at�least�in�analogy�if�not�intent.�This�is,�it�turns�out,�no�less�the Page�29case�with�Louisa�McCord�and�Angelina�and�Sarah�Grimk�.�Yet�while�Sarah�Grimk�could�"rejoice,�because�I�am�persuaded�that�the�rights�of�woman,�like�the�rights�of�slaves,�need�only�to�be�examined�to�be�understood�and�asserted,"�5�for�McCord,�the�nexus�linking�sex�and�race�would�lead�to�her�warning�that�"the�poison�[the�doctrine�of�women's�rights]�is�spreading�.�.�.�and,�it�is�but�a�piece�with�Negro�emancipation.�.�.�."6�Louisa�McCord�then,�like�other�apologists�for�slavery,�was�well�aware�of,�and�in�large�measure�responding�to,�the�thoughts�and�writings�of�her�Northern�antagonists.�It�may�be�instructive,�therefore,�to�situate�McCord�in�counterpoint�to�the�Grimk�s,�for�while�the�line�separating�McCord�from�her�transplanted�Southern�sisters�may�have�demarcated�two�disparate�cultures,�the�Mason�Dixon�divide�was�not�an�impenetrable�one,�as�ideas�did�flow�in�both�directions.Louisa�McCord�wrote�and�published�on�such�topics�as�political�economy,�free�trade,�secession,�slavery,�and�the�anthropology�of�race,�managing�almost�invariably�to�smuggle�the�"woman�question"�into�her�essays.�While�most�historical�treatments�of�McCord�are�concerned�with�the�textual�analysis�of�these�political�works�(she�wrote�for�such�popular�mid�nineteenth�century�Southern�journals�as�the�Southern�Quarterly�Review,�Southern�Literary�Messenger,�and�De�Bow's�Review)�it�is�only�by�foregrounding�the�more�self�reflective�McCord�that�emerges�in�her�letters,�poetry,�and�drama�that�we�can�fully�illuminate�the�thought�contained�in�her�polemical�pieces.�Elizabeth�Fox�Genovese,�who�has�written�of�both�the�public�and�private�McCord�in�Within�the�Plantation�Household,�concludes�that�McCord�like�other�"handmaidens�of�the�system"�of�Southern�plantation�paternalism,�ultimately�threw�her�lot�in�with�her�class�and�race�rather�than�her�sex.�Admittedly,�McCord�may�have�identified�with�and�thus�mimicked�the�rhetorical�style�of�her�male�proslavery�peers�by,�in�Fox�Genovese's�words,�writing�''in�the�idiom�of�the�canon."7�Certainly�a�review�of�her�expressly�political�writings,�uninformed�by�her�more�private�deliberations,�would�lead�one�to�such�a�conclusion.�But�as�a�woman�who�hoped�to�be�published�and�read�in�the�South,�such�literary�conformity�was�all�but�a�necessity.8�To�read�McCord�solely�on�this�level,�then,�is�to�miss�many�of�the�nuances�in�her�work,�which�far�from�being�transparent,�contains�multiple�layers�of�meaning.�Like�nineteenth�century�women�novelists,�McCord's�position�was�one�of�conflicted�authorship engendered�by�an�acute�awareness�of�the�paradoxical�role�which�female�publication�necessarily�demanded�when�private�women�stepped�onto�the�public�stage�of�the�literati.9�As�feminist�literary�critics�of�the�female�genre�of�domestic�fiction�have Page�30shown,�resolution�of�this�conflict�was�typically�played�out�in�the�work�itself�and�took�several�forms:�authorial�anonymity�through�the�use�of�pseudonyms�(McCord�used�her�initials�L.�S.�M.)�as�well�as�the�utilization�of�a�formulaic�plot�of�feminine�conventionality�that�glossed�over�an�undercurrent�of�discontent�and�subterfuge.�10�McCord,�then,�was�as�much�aware�as�these�female�fiction�writers�that�she�was,�to�use�Anne�Goodwyn�Jones's�playfully�sardonic�metaphor,�"dancing�to�someone�else's�music."11�And�in�McCord's�case,�the�composers�were�all�Southern�defenders�of�slavery.For�proslavery�proponents�in�the�blackbelt�South,�there�seemed�to�be�no�dearth�of�historical�material�to�draw�upon�in�their�rationalization�for�nineteenth�century�slavery,�which�was�buttressed,�they�claimed,�by�the�transhistorical�existence�of�human�inequalities [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
  • zanotowane.pl
  • doc.pisz.pl
  • pdf.pisz.pl
  • milosnikstop.keep.pl