Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Social guidelines what they could have restricted

In the times of Shakespeare, women were not allowed education and opportunities to create. Instead, the prevaling social role for women was for them to stay at home and take care of the family. This, of course, ruined the chances for many women who had the talent of writing great works but were not allowed to write them. I was quite interested by Woolf's example of Shakespeare's sister, who had the same level of writing of her brother, but did not receive as much recognition as her brother. For this example to work, there needs to be a woman who did in fact write like Shakespeare, but unfortunately there isn't, because either there was just not this fact, or that society has just unfortunately forgotten about her.

My question is that if there actually was a woman (an actual Judith Shakespeare, although she does not need the pedigree)who wrote at par with or beyond the levels of the best literary authors of that time (I know this is subjective, but just think that if the best author got 99 points, she would get 100) would society during that time still accept her works and give her the same amount of respect that they would to the 99-point male author. What do you think?

1 comment:

  1. I think the answer to your question is relative on the time period. I’m not quite sure as to what time period you're referring to, but I’m assuming it's in Shakespeare's time. Personally, I thought that Wolf's portrayal of what would have happened to Judith had Shakespeare had a sister, was a plausible outcome. I think that because in that time period society was run predominantly by men (even female roles in plays were acted out by men), that it wouldn't really have mattered how much more skilled the "100-point female author" was over the "99-point male author" because I doubt they would have paid enough attention to her to actually read and assess it. However, I say that with the notion that the woman is at a position in which she needs support. what I mean is if she was a woman who was individually financially stable (like Mrs. Behn) then I think she would be able to gain a bit more respect, but after all, she is a woman and woman were thought to be inherently inferior. I have a feeling that if she were a common woman in the time of Shakespeare, she would have been discouraged from showing her talent before she realized how much of it she really had.


Wider Two Column Modification courtesy of The Blogger Guide