During Catherine Beecher’s time, the extent to which women should be educated and the composition of that education was hotly debated. This short book is an outline of what should constitute an appropriate education for a young lady. Beecher spends equal time detailing a young woman’s moral education as she does the ideal young woman’s domestic education. The first half of the book is primarily devoted to theorizing about how women should be educated and a defense of a holistic approach to female education while the second half of the book details the specifics of how Beecher believes a house should be run.
According to Beecher: “We are not to annihilate the love of praise and admiration; but so to control it, that the favor of God shall be regarded more than the estimation of men” (Beecher 171). Also contrary to the commonsense wisdom of her day, Beecher suggests that young women should receive a rigorous physical education and women are not too delicate for intellectual rigor. “In consequence of this enfeebled state of their constitutions, induced by a neglect of their physical education, as soon as they are called to the responsibilities and trials of domestic life, their constitution fails, and their whole existence is rendered a burden” (Beecher 42).
It should be noted that Beecher was not an advocate of equality in terms of men’s and women’s position in society. Rather, she believed in the separate spheres ideology, or the notion that women and men should be relegated to different positions even though she also felt that women should be prepared for the mental rigor of domestic labor and that the female sphere was an important one. Still, many of Beecher’s principles were influential beyond that of the debate about the appropriate roles of the genders in American society. Beecher’s focus on education as a holistic art was important, given that it countered the usual emphasis on stuffing children’s heads with facts or drilling. Beecher saw children as individuals who were not small adults and who must be carefully nurtured so they reached their full potential, although she thought that women were uniquely capable of showing the necessary kindness as mothers and teachers to bring forth the next generation into being.
A good example of Beecher’s philosophy can be seen in her comments on women getting their hands dirty gardening. Even if women are fine ladies, she says, “it would be a most desirable improvement, if all female schools could be furnished with suitable grounds, and instruments, for the cultivation of fruits and flowers, and every inducement offered, to engage the young ladies in this pursuit” (Beecher 251). This will enable mothers to later instruct their own children about the natural world when the children are young and also enable women to cultivate their own flowers, which is far cheaper than having to purchase them to brighten the home.
Scholarly Journal Article
Roberts, Erie M. “Architecture of the Millennium: Catharine Beecher, Domestic Economy, and
Social Reform.” Constructing the Past, 7.1 (2006): 4-17. Web. 23 Oct 2017.
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/constructing/vol7/iss1/5
According to historian Erie M. Roberts, while Catherine Beecher was not a strong supporter of women’s suffrage, Beecher did support many prominent social justice movements. Roberts argues...
Yet, as Hendrick writes, Harriet also transformed those feelings into an engine of social change; "pursuing the Calvinist injunction to 'improve the affliction' and reap 'the peaceable fruits of righteousness' in the wake of" her son Charley's death, and "stirred up the nation to an awareness of its sin." Harriet wrote to her brother Henry, "You see...how this subject has laid hold of me...The poor slave on whom the
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now