Angel in the House - Revision history

WikiSysop at 12:22, 3 January 2018

2018-01-03T12:22:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:22, 3 January 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Term coined by [[Coventry Patmore]], who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. According to the myth of the "Angel in the House" women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the Victorian female (middle-class) ideal. In the Victorian era, separate spheres of men and women were supported.		Term coined by [[Coventry Patmore]], who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. According to the myth of the "Angel in the House" women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the [[Victoria\|Victorian]] female (middle-class) ideal. In the Victorian era, [[Separation of Spheres\|separate spheres]] of men and women were supported.

	Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.		Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.

Pankratz at 12:25, 29 November 2013

2013-11-29T12:25:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:25, 29 November 2013
Line 11:		Line 11:
	However, the ideal of the "Angel in the House" earned a lot of criticism by feminists in the 19th and 20th centuries, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: "She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure" (quoted in Rainbolt/Fleetwood 301).		However, the ideal of the "Angel in the House" earned a lot of criticism by feminists in the 19th and 20th centuries, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: "She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure" (quoted in Rainbolt/Fleetwood 301).


	~~----~~

	'''Sources:'''		'''Sources:'''

			----

	Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.		Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.

Pankratz at 12:24, 29 November 2013

2013-11-29T12:24:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:24, 29 November 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Term coined by [[Coventry Patmore]], who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. ~~He believed her to be the perfect woman and wife.~~		Term coined by [[Coventry Patmore]], who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. According to the myth of the "Angel in the House" women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the Victorian female (middle-class) ideal. In the Victorian era, separate spheres of men and women were supported.

	According to the myth of the "Angel in the House" women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the Victorian female (middle-class) ideal. In the Victorian era, separate spheres of men and women were supported.

	Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.		Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.

Pankratz at 10:58, 3 November 2010

2010-11-03T10:58:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:58, 3 November 2010
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.		Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.

	The French politician and anti-feminist ~~'''~~Pierre-Joseph Proudhon~~'''~~ divided women into two groups in the mid-century: on the one hand, there were the harlots, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. Proudhon envisioned a society which was centered on small family-owned and operated workshops headed by the husband. According to Proudhon, in such a society emancipation of women would be a disaster. Therefore, he tried everything to inhibit the emancipation movement. The politician said that wives were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore deficient and stupid human beings (Duby/Perrot 78ff., 568ff.). They were mainly there for bringing up children and for hard work, like ironing (an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time). Proudhon, among other politicians and philosophers, declared female inferiority as immutable.		The French politician and anti-feminist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon divided women into two groups in the mid-century: on the one hand, there were the harlots, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. Proudhon envisioned a society which was centered on small family-owned and operated workshops headed by the husband. According to Proudhon, in such a society emancipation of women would be a disaster. Therefore, he tried everything to inhibit the emancipation movement. The politician said that wives were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore deficient and stupid human beings (Duby/Perrot 78ff., 568ff.). They were mainly there for bringing up children and for hard work, like ironing (an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time). Proudhon, among other politicians and philosophers, declared female inferiority as immutable.

	Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women "was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain" (Duby/Perrot 477). Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.		Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women "was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain" (Duby/Perrot 477). Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.

Pankratz at 10:58, 3 November 2010

2010-11-03T10:58:25Z

MarL at 10:38, 3 November 2010

2010-11-03T10:38:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:38, 3 November 2010
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.		Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.

	'''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon''' divided women into two groups ~~[when? why?]~~: on the one hand, there were the ~~prostitutes~~, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. The ~~French~~ politician said that ~~the latter~~ were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore deficient and stupid human beings. They were mainly there for bringing children up and for hard work, like ironing; an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time.		The French politician and anti-feminist '''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon''' divided women into two groups in the mid-century: on the one hand, there were the harlots, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. Proudhan envisioned a society which was centered on small family-owned and operated workshops headed by the man. In such a society emancipation of women would be a disaster. Therefore, he tried everything to inhibit the emancipation movement. The politician said that wives were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore deficient and stupid human beings (Duby/Perrot 78ff., 568ff.). They were mainly there for bringing children up and for hard work, like ironing; an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time. Proudhan, among other politicians and philosophers, declared female inferiority as immutable.

	Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women "was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain" ~~[exact source??]~~. Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.		Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women "was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain" (Duby/Perrot 477). Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.

	From the beginning to the end of the 19th century, women were most likely depicted on pictures and photographs with a sewing machine. Women should identify with this kind of work and accept their traditional role. In an advertisement from 1896 for the firm Singer, the sewing machine was described as "Mother’s Machine" and as "most welcome wedding gift", which "greatly aids domestic bliss" ~~[exact source??]~~.		From the beginning to the end of the 19th century, women were most likely depicted on pictures and photographs with a sewing machine. Women should identify with this kind of work and accept their traditional role. In an advertisement from 1896 for the firm Singer, the sewing machine was described as "Mother’s Machine" and as "most welcome wedding gift", which "greatly aids domestic bliss" (Duby/Perrot 345 ff.).

	However, the ideal of the "Angel in the House" earned a lot of criticism by feminists in the 19th and 20th centuries, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: "She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure" ~~[exact source??]~~		However, the ideal of the "Angel in the House" earned a lot of criticism by feminists in the 19th and 20th centuries, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: "She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure" (Rainbolt/Fleetwood 301).


Line 18:		Line 18:
	'''Sources:'''		'''Sources:'''


			Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.

			Marsh, Jan. "Gender Ideology and Separate Spheres". <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Q3uDI2KyMUYJ:www.fathom.com/course/10701039/session1.html+pierre+joseph+proudhon+women&cd=14&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de>

			Rainbolt, Martha / Fleetwood, Janet, eds. "On the Contrary: Essays by Men and Women". Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984.

	Schildt, Gerhard. ''Frauenarbeit im 19. Jahrhundert''. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus, 1993.		Schildt, Gerhard. ''Frauenarbeit im 19. Jahrhundert''. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus, 1993.

	~~Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.~~

	Vyas, Shvetal. “Angel in the House v/s The Femme Fatale: The Varied Roles of Women in Victorian Literature”. 27 Jan. 2010		Vyas, Shvetal. “Angel in the House v/s The Femme Fatale: The Varied Roles of Women in Victorian Literature”. 27 Jan. 2010
	<http://www.suite101.com/content/angel-in-the-house-vs-the-femme-fatale-a194297>		<http://www.suite101.com/content/angel-in-the-house-vs-the-femme-fatale-a194297>

			<http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:i_bXOQl6e7AJ:www.pinn.net/~sunshine/whm2003/hericourt2.html+proudhon+housewives&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de>

Pankratz at 16:14, 25 October 2010

2010-10-25T16:14:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:14, 25 October 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~The term “Angel in the House” comes from '''~~Coventry Patmore~~'''~~, who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife, Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. He believed her to be the perfect woman.		Term coined by [[Coventry Patmore]], who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. He believed her to be the perfect woman.

	According to the myth of the ~~“Angel~~ in the ~~House”~~ women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the Victorian female ideal. In the Victorian era, ~~separated~~ spheres of men and women were supported.		According to the myth of the "Angel in the House" women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the Victorian female (middle-class) ideal. In the Victorian era, separate spheres of men and women were supported.

	Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every ~~“Angel~~ in the ~~House”~~. She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.		Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every "Angel in the House". She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.

	'''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon''' divided women into two groups: on the one hand, there were the prostitutes, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. The French politician said that the latter were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore ~~thick~~ human beings. They were mainly there for bringing children up and for hard work, like ironing; an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time.		'''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon''' divided women into two groups [when? why?]: on the one hand, there were the prostitutes, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. The French politician said that the latter were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore deficient and stupid human beings. They were mainly there for bringing children up and for hard work, like ironing; an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time.

	Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women ~~'''~~was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain~~'''~~. Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.		Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women "was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain" [exact source??]. Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.

	From the beginning to the end of the 19th century, women were most likely depicted on pictures and photographs with a sewing machine. Women should identify with this kind of work and accept their traditional role. In an advertisement from 1896 for the firm ~~‘Singer’~~, the sewing machine was described as ~~“Mother’s Machine”~~ and as ~~“most~~ welcome wedding ~~gift”~~, which ~~“greatly~~ aids domestic ~~bliss”~~.		From the beginning to the end of the 19th century, women were most likely depicted on pictures and photographs with a sewing machine. Women should identify with this kind of work and accept their traditional role. In an advertisement from 1896 for the firm Singer, the sewing machine was described as "Mother’s Machine" and as "most welcome wedding gift", which "greatly aids domestic bliss" [exact source??].

	However, the ideal of the ~~“Angel~~ in the ~~House”~~ earned a lot of ~~'''~~criticism by feminists~~'''~~ in the 19th and 20th ~~century~~, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: ~~“''~~She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure~~''.”~~		However, the ideal of the "Angel in the House" earned a lot of criticism by feminists in the 19th and 20th centuries, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: "She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure" [exact source??]

MarL at 13:57, 23 October 2010

2010-10-23T13:57:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:57, 23 October 2010
Line 16:		Line 16:
	----		----

	'''Sources:'''Schildt, Gerhard. ''Frauenarbeit im 19. Jahrhundert''. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus, 1993.		'''Sources:'''


			Schildt, Gerhard. ''Frauenarbeit im 19. Jahrhundert''. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus, 1993.

	Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.		Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.

MarL: Created page with 'The term “Angel in the House” comes from '''Coventry Patmore''', who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife, Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. He b…'

2010-10-23T13:56:50Z

Created page with 'The term “Angel in the House” comes from '''Coventry Patmore''', who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife, Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. He b…'

New page

The term “Angel in the House” comes from '''Coventry Patmore''', who wrote a narrative poem with this title for his first wife, Emily in 1854 and expanded it until 1862. He believed her to be the perfect woman.

According to the myth of the “Angel in the House” women should devote themselves entirely and unconditionally to the well-being of the family. These women embodied the Victorian female ideal. In the Victorian era, separated spheres of men and women were supported.

Selflessness and submissiveness were the personal characteristics of every “Angel in the House”. She was the one who turned the home into heaven; she was the backbone to her husband and her children.

'''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon''' divided women into two groups: on the one hand, there were the prostitutes, and on the other hand, there were the housewives. The French politician said that the latter were just a supplement to their husbands, who simply add beauty to the strength of men. In his opinion, women are on a level with children and therefore thick human beings. They were mainly there for bringing children up and for hard work, like ironing; an iron weighed 5 up to 6 kilograms in that time.

Nevertheless, housework was considered as work without any economic value. According to Jane Lewis, housework carried out by women '''was excluded from the category of ‘work’ in 1881 in Great Britain'''. Women who worked at home were classified as ‘unemployed’, which had the consequence that the working rate of women dropped by half.

From the beginning to the end of the 19th century, women were most likely depicted on pictures and photographs with a sewing machine. Women should identify with this kind of work and accept their traditional role. In an advertisement from 1896 for the firm ‘Singer’, the sewing machine was described as “Mother’s Machine” and as “most welcome wedding gift”, which “greatly aids domestic bliss”.

However, the ideal of the “Angel in the House” earned a lot of '''criticism by feminists''' in the 19th and 20th century, because women were depicted as being weak, mindless and unconfident. One of the most famous feminist critics was Virginia Woolf. The author wrote ironically: “''She [the Angel in the House] was intensely sympathetic. She was immensely charming. She was utterly unselfish. She excelled in the difficult arts of family life. She sacrificed daily. If there was a chicken, she took the leg; if there was a draught she sat in it ... Above all, she was pure''.”

----

'''Sources:'''Schildt, Gerhard. ''Frauenarbeit im 19. Jahrhundert''. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus, 1993.

Duby, George / Perrot, Michelle, eds. ''Geschichte der Frauen: Band 4: 19. Jahrhundert''. Frankfurt, New York: Campus, 1994.

Vyas, Shvetal. “Angel in the House v/s The Femme Fatale: The Varied Roles of Women in Victorian Literature”. 27 Jan. 2010
<http://www.suite101.com/content/angel-in-the-house-vs-the-femme-fatale-a194297>