Penguin have recently released the Sisterhood collection - six beautiful editions of classic novels, all written by and about women. I was lucky enough to be gifted a copy of Little Women by Louisa May Alcott and it's inspired me to put together a post honouring three of my favourite women writers of classic literature.
Each of these women gets a bit of a raw deal by the 'literary canon' and gets lumped into writing straight romance (by people who think romance is bad) when their work has so much more to offer. So I wanted to make the case for each of them, and hopefully inspire you to check them out if you haven't!
Each of these women gets a bit of a raw deal by the 'literary canon' and gets lumped into writing straight romance (by people who think romance is bad) when their work has so much more to offer. So I wanted to make the case for each of them, and hopefully inspire you to check them out if you haven't!
JANE AUSTEN
Of course Jane Austen is the iconic female writer. She's the first person anybody thinks of when we put together the words "classics" and "women", and yet she seems to get relegated to the category of old timey chick-lit, when in reality her novels are incredibly insightful and dynamic studies of social relationships.
Contrary to popular belief Jane Austen does NOT write love stories. Although all of her romantic pairings are very fond of one another and some certainly are in love, Austen writes marriage plots. Her stories are far less about sweeping romance, than they are about women trying to navigate a complicated and hostile social world where marriage is the only option they have for a happy ending. Each of her heroines gets married at the end, not because "love conquers all", but because that is what victory looks like for a woman in the 18th Century. Each heroine has successfully dealt with the backstabbers, the snobs, the meddling relatives, and the love rivals, and snagged herself a husband who she likes, who is relatively kind, and will keep her financially secure. Hooray!
That might seem a little depressing, but if you haven't read Austen I promise you it's not. Austen's novels are funny, witty, and full of caricatures that we all still know in our modern day world. Austen's narrative voice reads like a friend spilling the tea about the drama in her social circles and it is a joy to read.
Contrary to popular belief Jane Austen does NOT write love stories. Although all of her romantic pairings are very fond of one another and some certainly are in love, Austen writes marriage plots. Her stories are far less about sweeping romance, than they are about women trying to navigate a complicated and hostile social world where marriage is the only option they have for a happy ending. Each of her heroines gets married at the end, not because "love conquers all", but because that is what victory looks like for a woman in the 18th Century. Each heroine has successfully dealt with the backstabbers, the snobs, the meddling relatives, and the love rivals, and snagged herself a husband who she likes, who is relatively kind, and will keep her financially secure. Hooray!
That might seem a little depressing, but if you haven't read Austen I promise you it's not. Austen's novels are funny, witty, and full of caricatures that we all still know in our modern day world. Austen's narrative voice reads like a friend spilling the tea about the drama in her social circles and it is a joy to read.
ELIZABETH GASKELL
Charles Dickens is generally credited with giving a true and real voice to the poor of the Victorian age. Many scholars love to drool all over Dicken's work claiming that he, and only he, provided a literary vehicle to expose the complacency of the middle class and the suffering of the poor. They're all idiots.
If you've ever tried to read Dickens and found him boring and annoying (I don't blame you) then allow me to suggest giving Elizabeth Gaskell a go. A woman who did everything that Dickens gets credit for better than he did. Gaskell was a middle class woman living in England during the industrial revolution, and her novels are sensitive and engaging portrayals of the churning class conflict that arose between middle class business owners, and the poor people who lived, worked and regularly died in their dangerous, poorly run factories and mills.
Unlike Dickens, Gaskell doesn't present the situation through the eyes of unrealistic caricatures, and present an ending where suddenly all the poor people are magically rich. She also doesn't just kill off any woman who isn't a love interest. Her working class characters are not just victims, but a resourceful, grounded people with a strong sense of community and justice. North and South is the best place to start with Gaskell's fantastic work, but Mary Barton is, in my opinion, her most powerful and politically charged piece of writing.
If you've ever tried to read Dickens and found him boring and annoying (I don't blame you) then allow me to suggest giving Elizabeth Gaskell a go. A woman who did everything that Dickens gets credit for better than he did. Gaskell was a middle class woman living in England during the industrial revolution, and her novels are sensitive and engaging portrayals of the churning class conflict that arose between middle class business owners, and the poor people who lived, worked and regularly died in their dangerous, poorly run factories and mills.
Unlike Dickens, Gaskell doesn't present the situation through the eyes of unrealistic caricatures, and present an ending where suddenly all the poor people are magically rich. She also doesn't just kill off any woman who isn't a love interest. Her working class characters are not just victims, but a resourceful, grounded people with a strong sense of community and justice. North and South is the best place to start with Gaskell's fantastic work, but Mary Barton is, in my opinion, her most powerful and politically charged piece of writing.
DAPHNE DU MAURIER
My girl Daffers is another female writer who gets put into the category of 'romantic novelist', when it literally makes no sense to call her that. Du Maurier's writing is often sombre, her endings are rarely hopeful or happy. Even when her characters become romantically paired there is almost always sinister or tragic atmosphere. There is nothing about a Daphne Du Maurier novel that makes love feel aspirational, healing, or a force for good in the world.
If she were a man she would never have been stuffed into the chick-lit category, and would have the credit she deserves as a crafter of intense, evocative psychological dramas, full of rich imagery and this sense of dread that just twangs every raw nerve in the body. Alfred Hitchcock used her stories as inspiration several times, and her infinite range covered 14th Century time travel due to psychotropic drugs, male mechanical sex dolls, and a strange speculative Britain, in which she kind of, almost, predicts Brexit!
I read my Du Maurier novels many many years ago (though they are definitely due a reread) and although I've actually forgotten a lot of what happens in each, I still remember that creeping sinister atmosphere that pervades each one and never quite leaves you.
I read my Du Maurier novels many many years ago (though they are definitely due a reread) and although I've actually forgotten a lot of what happens in each, I still remember that creeping sinister atmosphere that pervades each one and never quite leaves you.
Let me know who your favourite female classic authors are! I'm always looking to expand my knowledge of women in literary history, and will definitely be doing a follow up to this post featuring some less well-known authors you should check out.
Thank you for reading!
Thank you for reading!
[this post features gifted items]
Find me on
What a cool looking collection! Nice post.
ReplyDeleteThank you :) x
Delete