Image
of
Women.

The Cult
of Womanhood in
the Enlightenment.

A Threaded Discussion....

"The Cult of Womanhood
in Eighteenth Century Thought."
An article by Marlene LeGates
     From "The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth-Century Thought," by Marlene LeGates, Eighteenth Century Studies, Vol. 10, pp. 21-39 (The American Society for Eighteenth Century Studies, 1976).

A thread posted by Melissa Moore....

Melissa Moore
Article Summary
LeGates, Marlene. The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth Century Thought

In this essay, Marlene Le Gates evaluates many eighteenth century writers' views of women and marriage and how these views compared to traditional beliefs already present in 16-17th century literary works. By first describing traditional beliefs as being mysoginistic and originating from ancient Greek philosophers, Le Gates states traditional views of marriage were pessimistic and tended to see marriage as "troublesome". The reasons for this were women's sexual impulses and their penchant for disobedience. This view of the "disorderly woman", according to LeGates, was changed to the image of the virtuous and "chaste maiden". Using Samuel Richardson's' characters Pamela and Clarissa, LeGates shows how these dramatizations changed views on marriage while reinforcing the hierarchical structure present within eighteenth century society. For example, this era produced an increased importance on peoples' freedom to choose their spouse. LeGates states that previous scholars have stated these changes arose from increased humanitarian or as a repercussion of capitalism, however, Legates attributes these changes to the strengthening of the nuclear family.

To defend her position, LeGates describes the views of the eighteenth century "Cult of Womanhood", stating that the "reduction of female virtue to chastity" and the moral superiority of women were not new concepts, only dramatized differently. Using the works of Richardson, Rousseau and Rowe, LeGates ponders the characteristics of female innocence and defenselessness showing that within traditional sources a female's virtue was contributed to by traditional controls that in turn were strengthened as well. This is clear in the belief that while the women in these stories were allowed moral superiority, they must ultimately surrender to the male authority, stating that women whom rebel "cannot be tolerated". Drawing illusions to the relationship between the people and the state, LeGates states that these dramas help to reaffirm the patriarchal authority within the family and state. Also, LeGates infers that these new concepts on womanhood challenged prevalent Christian beliefs about human nature during this era, due to the optimism present in the works of Enlightenment writers. However, while describing the different views of Enlightenment writers concerning the importance of social conditioning, Le Gates states that these beliefs also reinforced many of the prevailing attitudes concerning female sexuality and appetites.

Le Gates continues by stating that the popularity of the image of "chaste womanhood" sprang out of society's search for solutions to problems concerning male sexuality, not only female lust. Concluding this discussion, the author states that Enlightenment writers associated the virtuous woman with the aristocracy, while characteristics concerning sexuality and female insubordination were linked to the lower classes. Le Gates states that the new image of womanhood created during this time was the aristocracy's technique to secure their position within the status quo and cement the male gender as the dominant force within the family, society and state. LeGates sees this "celebration of Womanhood" by writers during the Enlightenment in a "specific social and intellectual context" which included concerns about family and society during the eighteenth century.

Well-written and informative, this article analyzes primary sources as a means to attribute to the emergence of the "Cult of Womanhood" during the eighteenth century. Students will find this article a pleasant read, even if they lack knowledge about the classic literature presented. By using this as her technique, LeGates allows the reader to see the continuation of traditional values into a new medium. LeGates suggest that scholars should not overrate the uniqueness of eighteenth century views of women. By arguing that chastity and obedience were primeval characteristics of the model woman, Le Gates shows that these beliefs only cultivated women's traditional roles within society and were not considered "revolutionary" themes.

Melissa Moore
melmoore11@excite.com
POSTED Fri 3/26/04 3:47 PM

A thread posted by Libby Abney....

Article Review
"The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth-Century Thought," Marlene LeGates

In her article "The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth-Century Thought," Marlene LeGates examines the origins of the virtuous and obedient woman during the Enlightenment, especially in the novel. The result is an interesting comparison of ancient Greek and medieval views of women and the views of the Enlightened, and later the Victorian, era.

The former view depicted women as seductresses who could not control their sexual urges and marriage as a necessary evil, a means to accomplish the practicalities of life. LeGates writes that this is a result of the mindset of ancient philosophers who saw the pursuit of knowledge and truth as the ultimate good. She illustrates this point with insights from writers such as Martin Luther, Socrates, and Theophrastus who wrote, "No one can serve two masters, wisdom and wife" (qt. on 58).

This image suddenly changes in the eighteenth century. Women are put on a pedestal of morality and become pure and virtuous rather than conniving and licentious. LeGates then must grapple with the reasoning behind this. How did previously misogynistic views transform into the glorification of the ideal woman, epitomized in the eighteenth century novel?

LeGates takes an interesting approach in that she sees this shift not simply as a natural result of the Enlightenment and the new capitalist trend but as a new support system for old values. LeGates writes, "The real changes in eighteenth-century society were not an increased gap between aristocrat and bourgeois but rather an increased gap between the upper classes and the lower, which were now massed in urban centers and thus posed a new, visible threat" (60). A morally upright female who remained obediently subservient to her husband helped strengthen the nuclear family, which separated the upper and lower classes. Further, she writes that this view ties into the Enlightenment challenges to Christianity, namely the ideals that human nature is indeed capable of achieving. The heroines of Pamela and Clarissa exemplify this view and, as widely read novels, helped popularize it.

LeGates approach makes her article unique. The connection between both the sexes and the classes provides insight into eighteenth-century society. Her quick examination of classical views help to accentuate the change that had occurred. However, as the Enlightenment was a rejection of everything that had come before, it does seem that this change was simply its natural result, rather than a decision on a massive scale to reorganize the justification of classes. Her argument would have been strengthened by examining other areas alongside the literary examples.

One of the most fascinating points that she brings up is the comparison between the English and French literary trends. She observes, "English novels celebrating love and marriage reflect the more advanced nature of the English economy and society, while French literature, steeped in the subjects of adultery, reveals this new identification with female innocence-for example, the decadence of a declining social order" (59). It would be interesting to further examine the differing social views as one empire grew throughout the world as the other collapsed.

As stated earlier, LeGates makes use of both classical and Enlightenment authors to illustrate her argument. She also makes use of many women's studies and history works by authors such as Antonia Fraser. Her writing style flows very well, allowing her to build a complicated argument point upon point, leaving the reader with a new analysis of a well-known ideal.

Libby Abney
lovely_libby81@yahoo.com
POSTED Mon 3/29/04 1:27 AM

A thread posted by Jeanette Holland....

The role of women in society continues to change in the twenty-first century and is likely always to be in such a state. This is not by any means a new phenomenon. Historical views of women are easily categorized as reflections of the societal views of any given time period. Greek and Roman philosophers placed great emphasis on knowledge, and Theophrastus even went so far as to say that "no one can serve two masters, wisdom and wife," and wisdom, of course, was the priority; however, it could not provide the same things as a wife: with wisdom alone, there would be "no housekeeper, no nurse in one's old age, and no heirs." Those were the only reasons men should marry. Women, of course, were viewed as the number one reason men should not marry, even centuries after the golden age of the Greek and Roman philosophers to whom Enlightenment thinkers looked for inspiration. There were a number of problems with women, namely their "inclination to sexuality and disobedience," and their shrew-like tendencies upon which satirists played when addressing the topic of marriage.

In the eighteenth century, however, there was a shift in thought, and women began to take on the literary role of virtuous damsel or obedient wife instead of the earlier wanton shrew. Characters like Samuel Richardson's Pamela, who remains a virgin until marriage, and Clarissa until death, began to dominate sentimental literature. The obedience and goodness of such characters leaves them to give themselves completely to the men they love. As the view of the role and characteristics of women changed, so too did the view of marriage, which became not only wise but honorable: in the words of Destouches, "No title is more honourable than that of a Married Man." Some treat the nicer attitude toward women as part of a more humanitarian outlook present in the eighteenth century than in earlier times; others treat is as a result of capitalism, which "enforced the leisure of women." Another option is that the growth of a female reading public produced demand for idealized versions of the women themselves.

Despite their kinder views of women, Enlightenment men still possessed a desire to restrain them but at the same time praised them in literature. LeGates asserts that the reason for this is that the Enlightenment sought to challenge Christianity's outlook on human nature, and the chaste woman is a fantasy about what "could be done with women in terms of social conditioning." Though it had long been argued that better education could better women's abilities as wives and mothers, Enlightenment thinkers insisted upon believing that educating women would be a dangerous thing to do. Though many of their female characters were portrayed as virtuous, Enlightenment writers continued to view women as sexually unstable beings "insanely chasing the codpiece if Nature had not sprinkled their foreheads with a little shame" in the words of Rabelais. Such an attitude was also apparent in the stories of Fielding and Rousseau.

LeGates summarizes the Enlightenment outlook nicely by saying that "in general, virtue in women was valued so highly because it was so difficult." In the presentation of it lay conflicting views from different areas of society: conservatives saw virtuous women in literature as symbols for the traditional values which the "new morality" challenged and even threatened; liberals, on the other hand, saw such a character as what could be the product of a refined and controlled society. Being virtuous could also be a sign of a woman's rank in society. Whether she achieved or was born into it, she was generally of the upper class; only "loose" women were of the lower orders. LeGates conclusion is that eighteenth-century writers did not intend to depart from earlier views of women, which were steeped in misogyny, but to reflect and respond to their own specific societal outlook.

Jeanette Holland
minorhistory@yahoo.com
POSTED Mon 3/29/04 1:46 PM

A thread posted by Jane Hendrickson....

Dr. Fritze
"The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth-Century Thought" by Marlene Le Gates
29 March 2004

In her essay, Marlene Le Gates illustrates to the reader that the origins of the cult of womanhood lays in eighteenth-century's Enlightenment. Le Gates argues that the Enlightenment helped females develop a more positive image in Victorian society. She compares literature from the 18th century to that of the 16th and 17th centuries. By comparing different female characters in 18th century literature to those characters from earlier centuries, Le Gates shows how the traditional views of women were slowly but surely evolving. Le Gates argues that in the 18th century the image of the "disorderly woman" was being replaced by the image of the "chaste maiden." She takes female heroines from novels and plays and describes them to be part of a larger movement. Le Gates argues that these famous characters were inspirations to the cult of womanhood.

Le Gates believes that several factors were involved in this movement. One being the humanitarianism of the 18th century and their moral values. Another factor, is that more women were learning to read. Another factor Le Gates considers involves established religion and the development of a new way of thinking. No matter what the cause, Le Gates firmly believes that the literature and the different writers' portrayal of womanhood played a big part in the movement.

This essay required a lot of literary research on works done in 16th , 17th , and 18th centuries. Le Gates went into great detail describing separate characters such as Richardson's Clarissa and Pamela. She backs her argument up well by comparing earlier characters to more recent ones. It is obvious to the reader that Le Gates is very well informed on the topic she discussed. The only thing needing improvement was my own knowledge of all this literature.

I admit I am not a literary scholar and some of the examples Le Gates uses I had no idea what she was talking about. But she did do a good job explaining in detail the different characters she discusses.

Jane Hendrickson
janeahendrickson@yahoo.com
POSTED Mon 3/29/04 3:23 PM

A thread posted by James Wagner....

In "The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth Century Thought", Marlene Gates examines the changing status of women during the eighteenth century. Prior to the Enlightenment, women had been viewed in a negative perspective. Women were seen as ignorant, self indulgent and lustrous. By examining different literary works of the eighteenth century, Gates is able to compare and contrast different ideas of the time period. The status of women definitely changed during the Enlightenment, but to pinpoint the exact source of change is rather difficult.

Marriage was an institution that experienced definite changes during the Enlightenment. Eighteenth century women developed the image of the chaste maiden and obedient wife. Gates not only explains the changes in marriages, she excels in answering the question "Why did marriages change?" Humanitarianism, capitalism, and an aristocratic social order all contributed to the new "loving" marriage. Marriage was for love and happiness rather than economic reasons. Gates' evaluation of the status of marriage leads the reader to a positive conclusion. It was a better institution after the effects of the Enlightenment.

This a well written essay with many educational facts. Gates does an excellent analysis of the various works while in the process proving her thesis. On the other hand, Gates fails to answer the intriguing question, "Did the Enlightenment help the status of women or was the Enlightenment ideals another method of repressing women?" Her essay raises as many questions as it answered. The essay seems a bit wordy and at times just does not flow particularly well. With that said, Gates article is a must read for anyone researching women and their status after the Enlightenment.

James Wagner
jameswagner33@yahoo.com
POSTED Wed 3/31/04 7:58 PM

A thread posted by John E. Kiesling, Jr.....

The Cult of Womanhood in Eighteenth Century Thought

This article discussed the changing times in which women were becoming more recognized and advancing in society. They still had to obey the man of the house however, society dictated changes in their roles independently.

When you review the article more closely it gives the thoughts of Richeleu and what he felt the woman's role should be at this point in time. The comparison to Don Juan and the woman's weakness was an excellent touch and created a positive factor for the article. It was in the body of the article that the most interest aspects appear such as traditions, societal views, literature about women, adultery, and other key points that express the worth of woman during the eighteenth century.

The fact that in this period woman would always be subject to man or to man's judgment comes to face with the reality of society. Thus by comparison the aggressive male and virtuous female is a paradox form of reaffirmation of the patriarchal family in Europe in the eighteenth century. However, in France women felt that they controlled society and man was powerless.

I felt that this article addressed several key factors about women in the eighteenth century and societies views on the subject. This is a valuable lesson that everybody must become aware of to allow for changes as time passes. The bad part is that it does not recognize the true reactions of society because the information is based on research and probably diaries. Therefore, it is hard to determine what is true and false. Furthermore, I feel that I learned a different perspective from what I have been taught in the past by other historians, and primary documents. I used the references in the body of the text to research the subject matter a little further in detail and gained value insight into the cult of womanhood during the eighteenth century. I feel that further studies are needed to formulate a full picture of the time period and what woman's role in society was.

This article represented a good look at the culthood of women in the eighteenth century. I truly enjoyed the references that were used. The examples helped me get a better picture of what to expect from women in the eighteenth century and how man has always used his power to rule over them. To class them, to control them, men were quite harsh. This will better be explained in a special topics class dealing with women of the eighteenth century.

John E. Kiesling, Jr.
JKieslingJr@aol.com
POSTED Thu 4/1/04 6:30 PM

A thread posted by Melissa Moore....

Hey Everyone!!! Just wanted to let you guys know that I enjoyed reading these critiques over our article. One thing after reading these though, it struck me that there are conflicting accounts concerning the Cult of Womanhood. For example, Ms. Abney states that Enlightenment thinking represented a rejection of the past beliefs concerning women. I thought that the new views of women present in the 18th century was merely traditional beliefs with a new spin to incorporate the new status of women. This point is also stated in Ms. Hollands' summary where she shows the shift in thought and how the literary scholars of the time were only responding to environmental factors. With Ms. Hendricksons' summary I love how you broke down the factors involved in the Cult of Womanhood and the honesty in your concluding paragraph. How refreshing! Also, ending the summaries, I appreciated Mr. Wagner's critique concerning the flow of the article, along with Mr. Kiesling's suggestion that scholarship concerning the 18th century Cult of Womanhood should be expanded. I think that all of these summaries are good, and if put together, we might have the most in depth-article summary ever created...seriously.

Melissa Moore
melmoore11@excite.com
POSTED Fri 4/9/04 3:09 PM

A thread posted by Ebenezer Bowles....

Several of the reviewers mentioned the novel Pamela by Samuel Richardson and noted how it informed eighteenth century views on women, chastity, marriage, and obedience. Jeanette Holland aptly described Richardson's "virtuous damsel" as a "literary role" in the genre of "sentimental literature." Pamela, who describes herself in her letters to "My dear Father and Mother" as "your dutiful daughter," assumes the dramatic literary role of "Beautiful Young Damsel" to "cultivate the Principles of Virtue and Religion in the Minds of the YOUTH of BOTH SEXES."

The quotes (and capitalized words) are taken from the novel. I had the pleasure to read it in February 1974, under the tutelage of Professor Ben Kimpel, my beloved mentor. Dr. Ben and his dear friend and companion, T. C. Duncan Eaves, were editors of the 1971 Riverside Editions text of Richardson's great work of literary art. Dr. Ben taught Pamela with inspiring intellectual passion.

"The virtues of Pamela spring rather from two qualities common, though not universal, in the best European novels of the last two centuries: close observation and accurate reporting of contemporary society and the imaginative projection of character," Professors Kimpel and Eaves wrote. "Accurate social reporting and imaginative projection were responsible for that air of reality which the first readers of Pamela felt."

In its day, Pamela was the vogue. Published anonymously on November 6, 1740, the novel became immediately fashionable. By May the epistolary tale of "virtue rewarded" was enjoying its fourth printing. Within a year it had inspired several plays, an opera, long poems, a series of paintings and engravings, and Fielding's shameless parody, Shamela. Protestant pastors recommended it from the pulpit and the Catholics placed it on the Index of Forbidden Books.

The moral lesson of the tale, that the virtuous damsel would be rewarded for her chaste behavior, struck a resonant chord in the popular culture of the day. What was Pamela's reward? She did "win" marriage to Mr. B., a wicked and vain man, who kidnapped her and sought ruthlessly to ravish her out of wedlock. By resisting him, she "earned" her place as wife of the Squire of a Kentish Estate. "Is marriage to her would-be seducer a proper reward for a girl who preserves her chastity?" Professors Kimpel and Eaves ask.

What about the value of Pamela's chastity? "With any historical imagination one can accept the fact that to a girl of Pamela's time and background chastity was all important," according the professors. "Indeed, socially it was all-important, since if Mr. B. had succeeded, Pamela would have been 'ruined' in a way no girl today can be ruined; her probable future would have been disgrace, prostitution, poverty, and disease. In addition, her education would have caused her further misery of feeling that she deserved her sufferings."

If I read my classmates' article summaries correctly, the Yale-educated feminist M. LeGates positions the idea of eighteenth-century chastity as an expression of patriarchal control of womanhood. I contend that chastity can also be viewed as a statement of matriarchal resistance to male control. To argue that the teaching of chastity is a male provenance is to denigrate the role of mother. It is an example of the kind of flaccid argument (oops, I did it again: another of those "heavy on the adjectives" stylistic sins that Miss Melissa Moore complained about in the "Code of Honor" thread) that serves the contemporary feminist agenda of victimhood — and also continues the relentless psychic and emotional assault by "empowered" and privileged women on the value of the modern male's role in the development of the common good and the advancement of stability and security in society and culture.

A wicked rake like Mr. B. or Lovelace (the dastardly seducer and destroyer of Clarissa Harlowe) seeks to conquer a virtuous and virginal woman to satisfy base and temporal desires. These are men who view women as prey. Who, we ask, would be standing on the other side of the fallen prey to exact full payment for her sin? Answer: Her fellow women, who eagerly destroy their "ruined" peer through gossip, indifference, and overt social hostility. They eliminate potential competition.

Men might settle their disputes on the field of honor through swift and decisive action, but women (some of them) prefer to bleed their foes to death slowly, cut by calculated cut, on the field of whispers and innuendo.

"O what a happy Creature am I! — May I be always thankful to God, and grateful to him!" Pamela wrote to "Honoured Father and Mother" at the end of her story. "When all these tumultuous Visitings are over, I shall have my Mind, I hope, subside into a Family Calm, that I may make myself a little useful to the Household of my dear Master; or else I shall be an unprofitable Servant indeed!"

Now that's a morsel a feminist can sink her fangs into.

Ebenezer Bowles
ebenezer@corndancer.com
POSTED Sat 4/10/04 3:09 AM

A thread posted by Dr. Fritze....

I have obviously read everyone's summaries, since I made the assignment and it is my job. But I want to add that you all had a lot of interesting things to say about the article.

Let me give you a little background. I included this article in a reader for world history that I helped edit about 10 years ago. My co-editors had already done a reader for American history that included an article about the Cult of True Womanhood in nineteenth century America. So I thought that the LeGates article would provide more background.

It is interesting because it shows us how we reached the Victorian Cult of True Womanhood, which still has significant vestiges in our modern society. Actually Melissa and Libby are both right in their summaries. LeGates points out that favorable views of women go back to Classical Greece. But during the Renaissance era, it was the misogynistic view that women were temptresses and morally inferior to males that prevailed. Some modern feminists engaged in ahistorical thinking might consider the cult of true womanhood to be a bad thing. But it was progress.

Renaissance thinkers considered men to be both physically, intellectually, and morally superior to women, except for that nasty sex-drive. Enlightenment thinkers gave women credit for morality and some intelligence. By Victorian times, women were definitely considered to be up on a moral pedestal, although necessarily subservient, to the males in their lives. But it was progress. Without that progress, there would be no equality for women today. It is akin to the idea of some women that typewriters are a symbol of women being relegated to low-paying jobs. In fact, a typewriter should be viewed as a battering ram because it allowed women to enter the workforce for the first time in large numbers. From menial jobs, women progressed toward equality with men in all jobs.

History is often about change but a lot of that change takes place one step at a time.

Ron Fritze
rfritze@conwaycorp.net
POSTED Tue 4/13/04 11:07 PM