{"id":985,"date":"2015-12-18T13:04:52","date_gmt":"2015-12-18T13:04:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/?p=985"},"modified":"2015-12-18T13:17:15","modified_gmt":"2015-12-18T13:17:15","slug":"conference-report-difficult-women-1680-1830","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/?p=985","title":{"rendered":"Conference Report: ‘Difficult Women 1680-1830’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Thank you to Lucy Hodgetts<\/a> and Marissa Bolin<\/a> for the following reports from the interdisciplinary conference ‘Difficult Women 1680-1830’ held at the University of York on the 27th-28th November 2015.<\/p>\n

To\u00a0see\u00a0the tweets from this conference please have a look at the Storify (day 1<\/a> and day 2<\/a>). More information can also be found on the conference website<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Conference<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Report by Lucy Hodgetts (PhD candidate, University of York)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2018Difficult Women\u2019 was a two-day conference put together with the aim of uniting scholars working on representations and conceptions of women in literature, theatre, art, and science of the long eighteenth century. The term \u2018difficult women\u2019 encapsulates a plethora of figures that resisted accepted norms of femininity, and who challenged the expectations of their gender by innovative means. This interdisciplinary conference was a vibrant reflection of current research into the numerous ways in which women were considered to be \u2018difficult\u2019.<\/p>\n

Shearer West\u2019s keynote lecture, \u2018What Do Difficult Women Look Like?\u2019 set the tone for a truly interdisciplinary conference by exploring a range of artistic interpretations of femininity. West argued that over the long eighteenth century women became more \u2018difficult\u2019 as they became more visible, and thus more visualised. The central tension in these stylisations was between the interplay of particularity and generality. West used portraits of the Duchess of Devonshire to highlight the differences in individualisation in earlier and later representations, and claimed that in attempting to capture something singular in celebrity portraits, artists were actually producing innovative work.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Prof.<\/a>

Prof. Shearer West. Plenary, day 1.<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

On the second morning of the conference I was lucky enough to chair a panel of three rich and diverse papers, \u2018Public, Private, and Class\u2019. The first paper was delivered by Dr Victoria Owens and explored the relationship between the domestic and industrial spheres in the life, career, and marriages of Ann Henshall, a Staffordshire businesswoman. A recent MA graduate from the University of York, Laura Griffin, gave the second paper. Exploring a wealth of graphic caricatures of Princess Charlotte, Griffin\u2019s talk was a fascinating examination of the misguided public-moralizing on female royalty and Britishness. The third paper was delivered by Cecilia Yu-Ting Yen on the relationship between propriety, property and the measuring of individual worth in Jane Austen\u2019s Mansfield Park<\/em>, and prompted a lively discussion on Austen\u2019s heroines.<\/p>\n

The panel \u2018Modern and Contemporary Voices\u2019 treated delegates to innovative re-readings of female writers. York PhD student Elizabeth Bobbitt gave a fascinating paper on the role of female antiquaries in Ann Radcliffe\u2019s posthumous historical novels, and offered a refreshing perspective on the gendered role of the antiquary. Emilee Morrall\u2019s paper on hunter\/prey relationships in the fiction of Charlotte Smith utilized novel theoretical approaches to explore the role of female agency in Smith\u2019s works. Finally, Professor Ros Ballaster\u2019s paper, \u2018Are we difficult enough yet? Feminist literary history and its futures\u2019, argued for a qualitative rather than quantitative grounds for engaging with recovered women writers.<\/p>\n

Perhaps my favourite paper of the conference was Kathleen Keown on \u2018Difficulties of Influence in Martha Fouke\u2019s amatory verse\u2019. In an infectiously enthusiastic talk, Keown introduced us to the passionate verse of Martha Fouke, known affectionately as \u2018Clio\u2019 to her admirers. Keown discussed Fouke\u2019s unique stylistic choices and why they were worth recovering, despite Eliza Haywood\u2019s best efforts to brand Fouke as a libidinous amateur poet. It was a rare achievement to introduce such a historically obscured figure so comprehensively in a fifteen-minute paper, and I left the auditorium with a renewed interest in amatory writing, and a brand new interest in Fouke.<\/p>\n

The conference concluded with Professor Harriet Guest\u2019s lecture, \u2018The Celebrated Mrs. Robinson\u2019, which explored Mary Robinson\u2019s complex self-representations in portraiture. The stark nature of George Dance\u2019s profile portraits of Mary Robinson and Elizabeth Inchbald were possibly considered by contemporary critics to be unflattering in their attempt to reject popular celebrity and depict more \u2018serious\u2019 women of letters. Yet to the modern eye they seemed arresting and stunning in their crisp execution. Like most actresses depicted in character, Robinson\u2019s portraits were considered as continuations of her dramatic performances. Although actresses used such depictions of their roles to mask their personal lives, Robinson\u2019s celebrity resisted this identity switch in innovative ways. Circulated and proliferated strategically to shape her public identity, Robinson\u2019s Warhol-esque image suggested not only a blurring of character and actress, but of public and private lives too.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>

Images from the contemporary art exhibit ‘(Difficult) Women’ curated by Arlene Leis at the Norman Rea Gallery (the venue for the conference wine receptions).<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

The breadth of papers read at \u2018Difficult Women\u2019 was testament to the richness and diversity of current research into women\u2019s roles in eighteenth-century culture. This was a truly inclusive event in which professors, students, and professionals all rubbed shoulders in their discussions of women\u2019s contributions to history, literature, politics, science, art, and material culture. The organisers should be congratulated and thanked for such a triumphant celebration of \u2018difficult women\u2019.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Report by Marissa Bolin (PhD candidate, University of York)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Originally intended as a one-day conference focused on the representations of independent and revolutionary women in the eighteenth century, the volume and quality of papers submitted to the University of York\u2019s Centre for Eighteenth Century Studies (CECS) became the basis for a two-day event. The conference was supported through funding from CECS, the Royal Historical Society, the British Society for Eighteenth Century Studies, and the Humanities Research Centre.<\/p>\n

Beginning with Professor Shearer West\u2019s paper entitled \u201cWhat Did Difficult Women Look Like?\u201d we considered how the eighteenth century became an important period regarding the perception of \u201cdifficult women.\u201d West argued that late eighteenth-century portraiture saw a change in the way in which women were presented. Progressing from flattened images of generic female figures, women began to be individualised in art and their images developed specialised identities.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>

The costume exhibition by Lindsey Holmes<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

The remainder of the first day\u2019s panels focused on eighteenth-century material culture, women\u2019s relationship with men, artistic representations of women, and female identities to explore the importance of the period in the development of \u201cdifficult\u201d women. Alison Duncan\u2019s analysis of Jane Innes, an influential aristocrat whose relationship with her brother forced her to become self sufficient, examined the ways in which unmarried women struggled to conform to social expectations. Dr. Rachel Turner and Heather Carroll, in contrast, investigated how women such as Kitty Fischer, Frances Abington, and Queen Charlotte fought purposefully against social norms, and the ways in which independent identity became visible through artistic representations of these important women.<\/p>\n

The second day addressed the concept of extraordinary women and their embodiment of what it truly meant to be \u201cdifficult.\u201d The day began with panels on the public and private spheres of women, women on stage, and the mental health of eighteenth century women. Lesley Thulin reflected on the presence of romantic melancholy in the lives of Dorothy Wordsworth and Maria von Herbert; Jack Orchard presented the juxtaposing identities of Catherine Talbot. In addition Eleanor Fitzsimmons\u2019 analysis of Percy Shelley\u2019s first wife Harriet, and Morag Allan Campbell\u2019s look at the development of puerperal insanity, created intriguing perspectives of women of the period. The day also involved a very popular panel on the portrayals of prostitutes, criminals, and female sexuality with presentations by Dr. Drew Gray on the Kotzwarra v. Hill murder trial and by Dr. Ruth Scobie on the Henry Sullivan v. Cowden, Cutler, and Storer trial. Dr. Janice Turner examined the high percentage of women making a living by stealing, while Lizee Oliver analyzed the shocking presentation of women\u2019s sexuality.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Prof.<\/a>

Prof. Harriet Guest. Plenary, day 2.<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

The conference concluded with a thought-provoking and in-depth analysis of the image of Mary Robinson by Prof. Harriet Guest, founder of CECS at York. Guest used the ways in which Robinson was presented in letters and in portraiture to argue that unlike the women that West discussed in her opening address, Robinson remained unique in her artistic portrayals. Unlike Siddons, Abington, and Inchbald, Robinson distanced herself from her theatrical roles in order to enhance her private identity.<\/p>\n

The two-day conference was well attended and offered a wide range of interesting papers which stimulated \u00a0discussion. Delegates contributed a fascinating range of perspectives to a deepening understanding of the ways in which \u201cdifficult women\u201d shaped the eighteenth century.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Thank you to Lucy Hodgetts and Marissa Bolin for the following reports from the interdisciplinary conference ‘Difficult Women 1680-1830’ held at the University of York on the 27th-28th November 2015…. Read more »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"pagelayer_contact_templates":[],"_pagelayer_content":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/985"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=985"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/985\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":998,"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/985\/revisions\/998"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=985"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=985"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bars.ac.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=985"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}