look at that fanny!

gahhhh I love Fanny Fern! I was reading some excerpts of her work in the Heath Antholoogy of American Literature and was so impressed I bought Ruth Hall for $3.95 at a used bookstore in North Hampton (visiting Smith whoo-hoo). So I haven't started Ruth Hall yet because h'm too into Pride and Prejudice, but I will share with you, dear reader some of the best bits of what I have read so far.

My favorite by far was "A Law More Nice Than Just", which was published in 1858; which describes Fern's dislike for the conventions of womens dress. She is outraged to hear that: "Emma Wilson was arrested yesterday for wearing man's apparel" (2105). Fern questions why this should be an offense, and what the problem is all about. She then goes on to describe the perils of women's clothing, especially when it has been raining which she describes as: "the thraldom of taking her daily walk through three weeks' rain, with skirts to hold up, and an umbrella to hold down...and all the time in fright lest...her calves should become visible to one of those rainy-day philanthropists who are interested in the public study of female anatomy" (2106, and yes I realize that quote was way to long). Fern not only recognizes the difficulty of managing oneself with petticoats and an umbrella to look after, while also avoiding puddles but she points out the "rainy-day philanthropist," perhaps an early ancestor of the whistling construction worker. These observations bring out some obvious troubles of women's attire, and also some that a modern reader would not immediately think of. Fern's husband however, is testament to the small minority of men in the time who also recognized the absurd limitations of women's attire. When Fern tells him she wishes to: "put on a suit of clothes and tramp with you" he playfully responds: "you are...only saucy on paper" (2106). While he seems to find the situation more humorous than grave (being the one who doesn't have to drag 8 pounds of cloth around his waist all day) he supports her efforts. After a 'guffaw'- filled walk Fern relishes in the freedom of men's clothing and issues a warning to any "Miss Nancy" who might not approve, she declares: "they who choose may crook there backs at for fashion, and then send for the doctor to straighten them; I prefer to patronize the shoe make and tailor. I've as good a right to preserve the healthy body God gave me, as if I were not a woman" (2107). So not only does Fern see walking in men's clothing as her womanly duty to stay healthy, but as an economic duty to support the tailor and shoemaker!

I think that this short little excerpt is still applicable today. I mean, we certainly don't have to wear petticoats anymore and women have been showing their ankles for years, but are we still barred by gender standards in fashion. The fashion industry has set a precedent for women's appearances that no normal human being can possibly live up to! Shows like America's Next Top Model and The Agency only help enforce the belief that to be beautiful you have to be tall and skinny. I know plenty of beautiful woman, none of which are a size 2. But this standard, oddly enough doesn't apply to boys. I think I will hurl if I get dressed up for one more event, in makeup and heels and a dress I need to constantly readjust, and see some boy stroll in wearing loafers, khakis and his dad's tie. How is this fair? Unless we primp ourselves for hours and labor over our outfits people assume we are sloppy, boys avoid you like the plague, and even girls criticize you! Remember the "power suits" of the 80s with the giant shoulder pads (more masculine!). Remember Kate Moss looking like she hadn't eaten in a year? We still aren't free to "stroll about" in "mens trousers" the styles have changed but the standards really haven't.

isn't she brilliant? more later!