----------
From: For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature on behalf
of Becca Stoler
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 1997 1:18 PM
To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU
Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Tie In Novels: The End of SF or the World as We
Know It?
On a whole, you are correct... however.... There were womyn, other than
school mistresses that did have jobs. It was by no means a common practice,
but womyn ran/owned shops, were seamstresses, cooks, maids, household
servants, they worked in debtors prisons and orphanages, in short, womyn did
indeed have jobs. Emily Dickinson even held a job on her one for a while. If
memory
serves, she worked in a ladies dress shop. Sorry to burst your bubble.
No bubble burst here. Look at what I said below...you have confirmed my
point...
well maybe schoolmistress or
some
>such designated job...as long as it conformed to womens work) let alone
have
>an identity.
WOmen may have been able to work, but they still did what were traditionally
"women's work"
I'm not a dog with a bone...really.
I do see your point...though and will concede on this discussion. One
question I have though, didn't a few women write under male names? I think
(if E.m.Forster can be trusted) that women had to stick to writing things like
romances (remember Miss Lavish) or adventure stories with a romantic element
to them? Many other writers who wanted to write something outside that league
took male pseudonymes...like George Sand and George Eliot.
Julien
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:07:10 PDT