She Hath Been Reading: Women and Shakespeare Clubs in America

Conclusion

117 Conclusion The women whose stories of reading Shakespeare I have related in this book were, for the most part, not well known, and their names have long since disappeared from the historical record, if they ever had a place there to begin with. Yet their sheer number means that Shakespeare had a substantial impact on the lives of ordinary women, who may not have achieved fame or fortune but who nevertheless influenced their own families and communities . They remind us of Shakespeare’s role in the history of women’s lives, particularly for ordinary women who were not famous authors, public figures, or well-known household names but who found a fulfilling and rewarding life of the mind by reading, studying, and performing Shakespeare. In addition, the women readers in this book do not fit into the narrative of the evolution of Shakespeare to an institutionalized academic highbrow author, and the politicized discussions of the canon have rarely associated Shakespeare with intellectual liberation for groups outside power structures.1 Yet the women readers chronicled in these pages make a case for Joan Shelley Rubin’s argument that “the meaning of texts [is] inseparable from the associations, longings, and purposes they acquired in the hands of readers.”2 To say that Shakespeare was liberating for housewives, that his characters were inspiring, that he provided intellectual stimulation for women amid their domestic duties,that he energized common people who met in the evening after working all day, and that he was a basis for building communities for thousands of ordinary citizens across America does not fit the image of Shakespeare as 118 SHE HATH BEEN READING the highbrow property of an elite and exclusive enclave.3 Yet numerous women readers designed their own journey of self-education and found value in Shakespeare as an author who fulfilled their desire for knowledge and gave them a place in intellectual history. The women who provide the basis for this book read Shakespeare of their own accord, separate from any established institution or academic setting. In doing so, they discovered subject matter that allowed them a remarkable autonomy to chart their own course of self-education and to express their own opinions through writing, analysis, discussion, performance, and adaptation. Many of these freedoms occurred for women in clubs with men as well as with women—this female intellectual space was not something that existed just with women, but rather was a concept that circulated in co-ed groups as well, where women were given equal opportunities to contribute. The bias against giving ordinary readers (particularly women) agency for literary and cultural change may also explain the absence of these women from the historical record.4 Further, these omissions speak to class and geographical biases in literary history. Indeed, one rarely hears of such places as Pocatello, Idaho; Jerseyville, Illinois; and Holden, Missouri, as noteworthy locations of literary activity, nor are housewives, farm women, and small-town teachers frequently given credit for effecting literary and cultural change. ***** If we return briefly to the Portia Club of Avon,Illinois,with which I began this book,we can trace a trajectory of the club’s focus in its one-hundred-year history. The club began in 1894 with “at home reading and study,” in which members were responsible for leading “discussions on authors, locations, art and music of that time.”The club’s main objective was initially studying Shakespeare,but as the twentieth century progressed, the aim of the club shifted according to the needs and interests of its members. In its second decade, social and political issues were still of interest; in 1905, the club’s tenth anniversary was celebrated with a “toast to the‘New Woman,’”and in 1909–10 the club discussed the temperance movement . From 1911 to 1921,the women took particular interest in civic issues,with a “special concern”for “Boys on the Streets.”Yet in this same decade,club historian Ruth M. Davis perceived a decline in the club: “How many‘modern’women would make and wear costumes and learn many lines just for the amusement of their friends? How many would walk to the library once a week during the winter? We know how few now are willing to study for and present programs with such enthusiasm.” Davis celebrated the progress of women but lamented the loss of solidarity and camaraderie: “I am glad that our lot as women has much improved but I retain a bit of envy for...