MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From Spinster to Career Woman: Middle-Class Women and Work in Victorian England, by Arlene Young

2021· article· en· W4365807518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lise Shapiro Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle classNewspaperSubject (documents)Gender studiesGirlScholarshipSociologyHistoryMedia studiesPsychologyLibrary sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian StudiesSame topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207