Stephen Leacock, "The Woman Question," The
Social Criticism of Stephen Leacock, ed. Alan Bowker (U
of Toronto Press, 1973) 54-55.
"There is nothing really open to her except one
thing—marriage. She must find a man who will be willing, in
return for her society, to give her half of everything he
has, allow her the sole use of his house during the daytime,
pay her taxes, and provide her clothes.
This was, formerly and for many centuries, not such a bad
solution of the question. The women did fairly well out of
it. It was the habit to marry early and often. The 'house
and home' was an important place. The great majority of
people, high and low, lived on the land. The work of the
wife and the work of the husband ran closely together. The
two were complementary and fitted into one another. A woman
who had to superintend the baking of bread and the brewing
of beer, the spinning of yarn and the weaving of clothes,
could not complain that her life was incomplete.
Then came the modern age, beginning let us say about a
hundred and fifty years ago. The distinguishing marks of it
have been machinery and the modern city. The age of
invention swept the people off the land. It herded them into
factories, creating out of each man a poor miserable atom
divorced from hereditary ties, with no rights, no duties,
and no place in the world except what his wages contract may
confer on him. Every man for himself, and sink or swim,
became the order of the day. It was nicknamed 'industrial
freedom.' The world's production increased enormously. It is
doubtful if the poor profited much. They obtained the modern
city—full of light and noise and excitement, lively with
crime and gay with politics—and the free school where they
learned to read and write, by which means they might hold a
mirror to their poverty and take a good look at it. They
lost the quiet of the country side, the murmur of the brook
and the inspiration of the open sky. These are unconscious
things, but the peasant who has been reared among them, for
all his unconsciousness, pines and dies without them. It is
doubtful if the poor have gained. The chaw-bacon rustic who
trimmed a hedge in the reign of George the First, compares
well with the pale slum-rate of the reign of George V.
But if the machine age has profoundly altered the
position of the working man, it has done still more with
woman. It has dispossessed her. Her work has been taken
away. The machine does it. It makes the clothes and brews
the beer. The roar of the vacuum cleaner has hushed the
sound of the broom. The proud proportions of the old-time
cook, are dwindled to the slim outline of the gas-stove
expert operating on a beefsteak with the aid of a
thermometer. And at the close of day the machine, wound with
a little key, sings the modern infant to its sleep, with the
faultless lullaby of the Victrola. The home has passed, or
at least is passing out of existence. In place of it is the
'apartment'—an incomplete thing, a mere part of something,
where children are an intrusion, where hospitality is done
through a caterer, and where Christmas is only the
twenty-fifth of December.
All this the machine age did for woman. For a time she
suffered—the one thing she had learned, in the course of
centuries, to do with admirable fitness. With each
succeeding decade of the modern age things grew worse
instead of better. The age for marriage shifted. A wife
instead of being a help-mate had become a burden that must
be carried. It was no longer true that two could live on
less than one. The prudent youth waited till he could
'afford' a wife. Love itself grew timid. Little Cupid
exchanged his bow and arrow for a book on arithmetic and
studied money sums. The school girl who flew to Gretna Green
in a green and yellow cabriolet beside a peach-faced
youth—angrily pursued by an ancient father of
thirty-eight—all this drifted into the pictures of the past,
romantic but quite impossible.
Thus the unmarried woman, a quite distinct thing from the
'old maid' of ancient times, came into existence, and
multiplied and increased till there were millions of her.
|