I am going to look at the pamphlets on the Contagious Diseases Act for my research paper. Comments, suggestions, or any constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated.
I plan to look at the three pamphlets from the Pall Mall Gazette that were offered to the class and put them into conversation with each other regarding the role of men in prostitution.
My ideas are not yet fully developed on this as I have not had time to examine each piece as closely as I would like to, but I am having them copied currently and already have some ideas. It seems that each writer, Mrs. Malleson, Justina, and Anonymous have an opinion of the role men play in perpetuating prostitution. They all seem to think that men hold at least some (if not most) of the responsibility. One of the reasons is at this time men had more economic power than women and the lack of economic power forced women into this work. Another reason is that it was men who frequented the prostitutes so not only were they helping to continue employment as prostitutes but they were also then spreading disease to their wives and children.
I would like to explore this idea of men's responsibility and lack of accountability with regards to prostitution. I think my goal would probably be to answer the question: How do each of these writers differ in their opinion of the role of men (as clients) with regards to prostitution and the spread of diseases?
For this I would the only sources I have at the moment are the three pamphlets I looked at in class. For aditional sources it is a possibility to look further into the London Lowlife Collection, but I'm not sure how much I want to complicate my research with aditional opinions. One source I will look into, however, is "The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon." This is also from the Pall Mall Gazette and looks into the issue of what was called "white slavery" basically forced prostitution and child prostitution. This writing could help me find more about the way this issue was viewed at the time.
I have quite a bit more work to do before I can turn in a paper proposal, but I am hoping I can work with this question, because I find it highly interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Alex, I think you idea about men and prostitution should help you to come up with some pretty strong arguements. I know we are both pretty much stuck in a bind and are not sure exactly where to go, but I believe you are on the right track. It sort of looks as if we are doing almost the same project but the opposite. I am going to compare the different views of the various authors on prostitution as a whole. It would be great if you find any useful secondary sources that applies to your because maybe they'll apply to mine in a diff. way as well and i'll do the same!
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very interesting and unique idea for an investigation! I think that your arguments concerning economics will be the most helpful in unpacking your questions. After all, money is power, and I think it will be quite enlightening to investigate how men use this power to perpetuate prostitution, and all of its consequences. I'd be interested to know what other (if any) secondary sources you would use to explain how each writer conveys their opinion on the issue. Perhaps the different techniques in their arguments or claims will affect how they are received by their audience (and who is their audience for that matter).
ReplyDeleteAlex, I wouldn't be afraid of complicating your research issue too much, since you can always narrow your argument from your findings, but you don't want to limit yourself in the outset. Explore a lot now and narrow later.
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like you've identified a nice point of dissonance in doing a comparative analysis of how men's role is implicated differently in the three texts (because I think you're right in noting it is different--it's not as simple as the others just vilifying "men" as an essentializing concept). And when we take into account that Stead wrote a document eventually helping to repeal the CDA, then we have a situation as complicated as Campbell's "feminist rhetoric." (I don't mean to imply that you use Campbell's article, just to point out that there's a pluralization of manhood at work in these texts as well ... now that would be a cool thing to uncover!)
You're well up to the task on this one!
-Dr. Graban
Since we have been studying rhetorical devises and styles with regards to women writers all semester, it could be really interesting to look at some male writers on this topic and see whether they use some of the same rhetorical styles and elements that we see in our women's writing. Where does it differ, and why? I was thinking about Wells and Mother Jones, and how their writing seems to deviate more than other women's from the ascribed "feminine style" (even beyond Campbell's definition). Were there men writers on this topic who used more feminine rhetoric to appeal to a certain audience?
ReplyDeleteAlex,
ReplyDeleteI found your comment about the economic roles of men and their relation to prostitution interesting. It could be a possible direction to go--maybe in evaluating who was responsible, where they were, what social standing they had?
Was this poor men, or was this eliot spitzer prostitution? I don't know if that necessarily makes a difference, but it seems to in our society today.
I've gotten quite a bit further in my research and development of my questions and argument since I last posted. I would appreciate feedback (particularly from Professor Graban) on my thesis and questions but definitely do not expect it since I know how busy we all are.
ReplyDeleteThe question I have been working with is: How do these three Victorian women's (Justina, Anonymous, and Mrs. W.T. Malleson) writings argue for the repeal of the CDA? and as an aspect of this how do they complicate, the roles of and relationship between, men and women?
At the moment I have a thesis written out, but I expect it will change at least slightly as I continue my paper so that it reflects my entire argument better, but here it is. Thesis: These three Victorian women argue to repeal the Contagious Disease Acts through the use of ethos, pathos and logos, as defined by Killingworth; Simultaneously these women complicate the roles of and relationship between men and women by dividing each gender into smaller categories based on their relation to the Contagious Disease Act. For women these roles include the upper class women working to repeal the CDA, the victimized by circumstances prostitute, the working-class women who are at risk of becoming targets of the CDA unjustly, and the wives who suffer from a venereal disease because of their husbands illicit activities. For men the roles include doctors, politicians and police (men in power) who support the CDA, men in power who are opposed to the CDA, men who are clients of prostitutes, and working-class men whose wives are at risk of being unjustly implicated as prostitutes by the CDA.
I plan to work through the use of each of these roles (although I may perhaps end up excluding the wives who suffer from venereal disease because of their husbands simply because I am not sure it will end up being entirely relevant or helpful to a clear and concise argument) and the use of ethos, pathos, and/or logos in each of the writings of the three women. I think I will probably end up organizing my paper by writer simply because each of the three women use such unique combinations of roles and rhetorical appeals to make their arguments.
Alex, you certainly have come a long way with your question! I imagine you won't have to work too hard to try to "prove" a use of ethos/pathos/logos, since Killingsworth says those are analytical constructs we can find at work in any text depending on how we look at it, and that these appeals typically serve larger points (for example, perhaps a particular pathos appeal is made by more than one writer to construct a particular relationship between men and women).
ReplyDeleteI do wonder if K's concept of kairos might be more useful, i.e., how and whether each woman's argumentative style makes use of "timeliness" in order to complicate these relationships?
And I also wonder if you end up going writer by writer, whether that means you will also go complication by complication (i.e., each writer's set of strategies works together to complicate the relationship in one way)?
Have fun with this!
-Dr. Graban