From Spinster to Career Woman: Middle-Class Women and Work in Victorian England, by Arlene Young
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: From Spinster to Career Woman: Middle-Class Women and Work in Victorian England by Arlene Young Lise Shapiro Sanders (bio) From Spinster to Career Woman: Middle-Class Women and Work in Victorian England, by Arlene Young; pp. x + 217. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2019, $110.00, $29.95 paper. Arlene Young’s scholarship has been influential in shaping research on women, work, and Victorian culture for over two decades: in addition to editing two novels for Broadview Press (Tom Gallon’s The Girl Behind the Keys [1903] and George Gissing’s The Odd Women [1893]), she is the author of the monograph Culture, Class and Gender in the Victorian Novel: Gentlemen, Gents and Working Women (1999). In her most recent book, From Spinster to Career Woman: Middle-Class Women and Work in Victorian England, Young extends her scope to include historical and literary perspectives on middle-class women’s struggles to gain entry into two key professions in the nineteenth century: nursing and typewriting. Young approaches her subject with an interdisciplinary methodology based in close attention to Victorian newspapers and periodicals, revealing the heated debates about the transformations wrought in both fields. This is an engaging book that will be of interest to scholars in literary studies, history, and periodical studies, and to readers invested in exploring the relationship between gender and class in discourses around women’s work in the Victorian era. As Young notes in her introduction, “At the beginning of the Victorian period, to be a middle-class woman was to be a dependent—a daughter, a sister, a wife, a mother. . . . By the end of the century, middle-class women . . . could choose not to be dependent, not to be limited to a domestic life. . . . This change was little short of revolutionary” (3). To explore the cultural significance of this societal shift, Young addresses Victorian debates over the “Woman Question” in her first chapter, examining depictions of several types including “the Strong-Minded Woman, the Glorified Spinster, and the New Woman” (12–13). The latter type has been much studied, but Young usefully reorients our attention to the first two figures and to their agency and cultural roles. Florence Nightingale, the iconic “Strong-Minded Woman” in George Whyte-Melville’s 1863 essay on the topic, evokes the power associated with the intelligence, judiciousness, and attention to duty associated with this figure, one who also, Young notes, “retains essential characteristics of the ideal Victorian woman” (37). The “Glorified Spinster,” by contrast, recasts the figure of the “Old Maid” as (in the words of Frances Martin, whose 1888 essay in Macmillan’s Magazine [1859–1907] coined the term) not “a woman minus something,” but “a woman plus something” (36), and importantly, a woman defined neither by marriage nor even her career, but by “what work allows her to do and to be” (37). In subsequent chapters, Young examines the two types of employment that structure her study. The nurse and the typewriter (which was the period’s term for the woman worker herself, not solely the machine she worked on) represent for Young two distinct aspects of middle-class women’s employment: a traditionally feminine field (nursing), redefined through debates over female agency, authority, and caregiving, and a newly modern occupation (typewriting) waiting to be defined by the women workers who would come to be associated with technological capability and modern innovation. In paired chapters on the historical context and literary representations of Victorian nursing, Young debunks the myth of Nightingale as the gentle Lady of the Lamp, recontextualizing her and other influential figures as assertive and authoritative in period disputes over hospital reform. Young then analyzes a wide range of fictional narratives [End Page 447] that critique and reimagine Charles Dickens’s caricature of Sairey Gamp, the drunken and disreputable nurse in Martin Chuzzlewit (1842–44). In texts ranging from Elizabeth Gaskell’s Ruth (1853) to fictionalized memoirs and sketches published in periodicals like Fraser’s Magazine (1830–82), Work and Leisure (1880–93), and the Girl’s Own Paper (1880– 1956), to little-known novels like Elisabeth J. Lysaght’s A Long Madness (1877) and George Manville Fenn’s Nurse Elisia...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».