1. Describe how the colonial rights of women were considered more "advanced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century?
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain.
26 comments:
Anonymous
said...
1. In America, there were no set roles or trades as there were in England. There was only necessity. Women in England were forced into the house because of age-old traditions that dictated the house as where they belonged. In America, however, there were no such traditions, there was only the need to prosper, and so women worked alongside men in the American fight to maintain an existence. Early American laws also shared this view, showing no special application to a particular sex. That came later. 2. In America, high-education was of little use. Where could advanced physics or theology ever be useful in Colonial America? The only thing that was important in America was the knowledge of a trade. What mattered to the American man was proficiency. If a man could produce something useful, he could prosper in America, where no shackles of class distinction bound him as they would have in England.
1: The colonial rights of women were much more liberal compared to her contemporaries in England because in America there was no long standing tradition and belief that women were only made for making babies and being homeowners. In America there was only the goal of surviving and making money and not like in Europe where the men did this and the women were dainty and fragile. Women in America took rols of merchants, and tradeswomen working side by side along men. 2: in Colonial America there was no need for a scholar who has pure intelligence because there was no place in society for him. People in the Americas could pursue higher learning yes but they could not only focus on their studies because in America there was a need for prospering and thriving in a new place. America did not lack anything, they just decided to make up for it in other areas that did not involve giant books.
1. In colonial society, women definitely had great opportunity compared to the situation in England. While women in England were generally restricted to the home and housekeeping, women in America could use the house to their advantage. Since the man worked near the home, women were able to learn from them, and society in general was more open towards women in business. The desperation for work led to more acceptance as well, because it no longer seemed to matter who the money came from. Also, women in the colonies tended to learn more then than even in the 20th century. This was because it was expected that they educate their families. 2. When Boorstin says that America lacked enthusiasm for a man of... pure intelligence.." he meant that America was essentially failing to act. After all of the change that occurred during the transition to America, the people of America did not want any more change. A "regular" was now set in motion for their new home, and because it was comfortable, it was very hard to be motivated for any kind of change. They also were looking to step out of the spot light. The people of America simply wanted to stay in pattern for a while, and in that way, it really was just watered-down intelligence.
1. Women had a greater role in the colonies not because men saw them as equal, but rather men saw them as a source of labor to help survive. In England, it wasn't neccesary for a woman to work the fields just to get enough food to make income and feed the family (at least in the upper class, which didn't really exist in the colonies). A woman in England was expected to remain in the house all day and to rear the children based on the tradtions. 2. In the mojority of the Americas, a man who was mentally fit but physically lacking was no use at all in the fields. There wouldn't be a need for intellectuals until a division of labor had been met, which would allow for artisans and thinkers to emerge from the masses.
The rights of women in America were considered more advanced than women of England due to the fact that women in America were not confined to the home. In England the women had to stay in the home to cook, clean, and raise her children. However in America, since the population was so small everyone was needed to help with the farming and other responsibilities in order to survive. Later on the plantations the plantation owners wife was responsible for caring for the sick slaves. She acted as their doctor getting more recognition.
2. The society of America was one where there were no scholars because there was no need for them. The main objective of colonial America was to provide for its mother country and to produce enough for itself to survive. It had no time for books, there was only time for survival.
1. The circumstances of colonial America provided women with boundless liberties that had not been exercised in England, and would not resurface until the 1900s. The virgin state of the land and industry on it meant all hands had to be on deck. Items were manufactured in the house, leading to opportunities for women to learn crafts previously devoted to men. The introduction of the printing press caused a large number of female printers and publishers during this period. Men during the time even admitted the essential need of an industrious woman in order to be successful. The lack of proper schools and the isolated nature of the colonies also added the dependability of woman to educate the family. Despite the tremendous advances made in women’s rights during the colonial period, old preconceptions remained as Thomas Jefferson admitted the education of his daughter to be “considerably different from what I think would be most proper for her sex in any other country than America.
2. The force which spurred the colonies of America was, above all, practicality. In the New World, the extent and breadth of your knowledge in areas concerning philosophy and art mattered not. Instead, emphasis was placed on experience and actual ability to complete tasks in order to survive. Boorstin states that “men were judged by how well they performed rather than how much they knew…” It was this practical mentality which led to America’s lack of “enthusiasm for the man of ‘pure’ intelligence.”
1. The colonial rights of women were considered more advanced than the rights of European women because American women had a more diversified role. Even outside the kitchen, women had a useful purpose. Since the men worked near the home, women seized this as an opportunity to learn new crafts that in England were strictly for men. It came to be that the men needed the women's help in order to run his business and it was not uncommon to see large numbers of women printers, newspaper publishers, merchants, and tradeswomen. In the colonial period, it was not considered strange or out of place to see a working woman because the scarcity of labor removed the social prejudices. 2. "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure' intelligence" because it was becoming more common that the most specialized jobs did not require a degree to practice. In Europe, men studied long and hard in the university in order to obtain a medical degree; since no one wanted to be practiced on by an uneducated amateur, every man needed special training and a certificate of authenticity. However, with the lack of American universities, doctors without degrees were trusted. In America, every man rich or poor had the chance to become a doctor and since they relied on nature to cure their patients and didn't go to the drastic measures in order to make a medical discovery, their patients had more confidence in getting better with the colonial doctors. However, since not only the privileged were going into medicine, it created greater competition for the educated men and thus discouraged them in being enthusiastic about becoming a highly trained doctor.
1. The colonial rights of women were considered more advanced compared to conterparts in England because in America, there really were no set positions. In Europe, there were “liberal” arts, and “servile.” Customs such as these seemed “vague and artificial in America.” (pg 185). In America, men had to prepare for necessity, had to prepare for any “role.” “Although our knowledge is only fragmentary, evidence suggests women in colonial America were more versatile, more active, more prominent, and on the whole more successful in activities outside the kitchen than were their English counterparts.” (pg 186). Women in England due to tradition remained in the house doing housework and taking care of the children. In America, women had opportunities to be printers, newspaper publishers, apothecaries, general medical practitioners and more. Laws even, did not discriminate against gender for a time. In America, the need to prosper enabled women to work alongside men, maintaining survival and gaining new knowledge in the process. 2. A higher education gave you more knowledge and therefore more “power.” In America, there was not much necessity for higher learning. In America, the people needed to know how to survive and gain profit through farming or trade. “There is room for everybody in America; has he any particular talent, or industry? He exerts it to procure a livelihood and it succeeds.” (pg. 188). Prospering was the most important thing in America, not higher education of Theology, liberal arts, physical science, etc. Boorstin also mentions “a wholesome fear” people had of a more intelligent person, afraid they would “raise any man about men.” Due to this fear and Americans being more interested in survival and prosperity, America lacked this enthusiasm.
1. Women in colonial America had almost equal rights with men. Women had more rights in America than English women did at this time. The law protected women and gave them powers such as divorce and control of business. Women were also expected to be educated. . Women were responsible for the education of their children. If a woman was not educated, her children also would be poorly educated. Women had jobs outside of the home as well. There were many female printers and newspaper publishers. Women in New England would become merchants, while their sailor-husbands were at sea. In the New World, women worked just as hard as their husbands did. A family’s success depended on both the Mother and the Father both inside and outside the home.
2. A man of "pure intelligence" could not make it far in America during colonial times. Pure intelligence was able to help you in England, but not here. A man needed a work ethic as well as intelligence. To prosper in the New World you had to work hard. Intelligence meant nothing if you did not apply it. There were no theologians in America: one, because no one had time to sit around all day and ponder; and two, because there was little need for theologians. Americans focused on prosperity and community building rather than philosophy and theology.
1. Colonial women were granted more chance to learn things outside the house. Some women were able to become newspaper publishers and even medical practitioners. Women in New England became merchants when there husbands left for months on end. Women in colonial America were granted more rights because they had more opportunities to work. Men needed there wives to be able to run things on the plantations when he was away. 2. Boorstin feels that men in America are lacking the pure intelligence that one could find in Europe at this same time. This could be because in America there was a realm of possibilities, and Colonist didn’t feel so cut throat competitive as those in England did. In England you would become successful if you went to a University and became a prominent political figure. In contrary, Colonist found that they could be successful doing anything they wanted. They had more freedom.
1. Women in America had responsibilities that were not solely limited to household chores, unlike most women in England at the time. This was due in part to the fact that labor was scarce in the colonies and limiting laborers to men would restrict the possibilities of the colonies to expand. Because of the fact that men worked with household manufactures, women were also able to observe, learn the trade, and then help their husbands. Women were more frequently educated, to aid them in educating their own families. It was not only in practice, but also in law that women held more rights, such as the right to be involved in business, than that of their European counterparts.
2. “America lacked enthusiasm for the man of profound, detached, and “pure” intelligence.” This quote of Boorstin’s emphasizes the American ideal for a man that was a “jack-of-all-trades” and could perform many different jobs effectively as opposed to the European ideal of a man that could do one job flawlessly. Quite the opposite of profound, detached, and having pure intelligence, such as philosophers, Americans valued those who were practical, engaged, and had a more daily intelligence. It was also harder to become someone of the latter description because the college system in America at the time could not educate their students to reach that level of high-learning.
1. Since the women were needed in America, they worked alongside the men in order to survive, and so weren't expected to sit at home and rear children, like in England. If an area needs women, they usually aren't treated as inferior. If they don't, as in England's case, then the women become housebound and lose rights.
2. America didn't need a man of "pure intelligence". It needed a man who could work and was physically strong. Intelligence helped for knowing a trade, but being only smart did nothing to help you work to survive.
1. Women had more rights in the colonies for several reasons. Their husbands and fathers would often work at home so wives and daughters could learn some from observation of their husband's work. Many women became printers and publishers on their own, not just continuing the work of a deceased husband. They often learned how to be in the medical field too. New England women could become merchants and traders to support themselves while seafaring husbands left. Mothers were responsible for teaching their children at home so they had to know a fair amount to be able to pass on the knowledge to their children. Some girls, such as Thomas Jefferson's daughter, Patsy, and Cotton Mather's Katherine, were taught Latin and Greek to be able to teach it to their own children. Women also had more rights of divorce in the colonies. In many other places it was far more difficult for women to get a divorce. Women were also featured more prominently in society and public life in the colonies than they were in the Old World. Their right were protected far more than the rights of the women under the English common law. 2. men of "pure intelligence" weren't put on a pedestal in the colonies like they were in England. The colonists didn't like to put one man above another because of their intelligence or lack thereof. There was room for everyone in America. It was also more necessary to be practical than anything else. "...has he any particular talent, or industry? he exerts it in order to procure a livelihood, and it succeeds" As Crevecoeur said, it was important in America for someone to have a talent or a practical skill to thrive, because being a skilled theologian wouldn't help you plow a field.
1.) The reason for the "advanced" treatment in the colonies was driven by need. Women were a neccessity to the survival of the colonies, therefore they worked with men as equals to keep the colonies operating. In England, women mostly worked in the house, but this wouldn't work in the americas because there wouldn't be a large enough work force to support the rapidly growing country.
2.) There was no need of "pure intellegence" in America because it had little practical use in everyday life. Life in America was based off of neccessity, and the only intellegence you needed was intellegence to get through the day.
1) Boorstin describes three reasons for the increase of women’s rights in America compared to that of England or the later 20th century. The first is that many professions were carried out much closer to the home, and thus it was much easier for the women to observe the man at work or even aid and take part in the daily duties. This allowed for women to participate in various professions. The second reason was that there was very little labor already due to the population and women simply had to help in more tasks than just what was considered “proper”. The final reason concerned the education of offspring. Because the distances to schoolhouses and such were so great, it became proper in America for women to educate their children, giving them more responsibilities.
2) Perhaps what Boorstin refers to by the lack of enthusiasm for “pure” intelligence is that the American philosophy is to just get it done, without much worry of efficiency or prior study. This goes back to the description of the Puritans when they first settled, they weren’t out to create some Zion; they were simply there to survive. That’s the reason why Americans didn’t worry about the college versus university distinction or other such issue. Practicality simply overweighed thoroughness in colonial America.
1. While Boorstin acknowledges the fact that there were few accounts of women in colonial America, he states that woman in America had more opportunities and thus were more versatile and more successful/advanced in the society (outside of the kitchen). Most often, men worked in or close to the household which gave the women more of a chance to learn something. Sure there were a lot of women that took up work publishing newspapers and helping tend to fields because their husbands were away or dead, but more and more women were starting to take up work for their own reasons. Southern plantation workers needed their wives help to keep their business properly working, and accounts like that of William Byrd’s show that the there was a heavy reliance on woman. Because of the scarcity of labor woman were able to find work everywhere, and the “social prejudices” were practically removed. Another factor that played into woman’s roles being more advanced branched off of the system of colleges and universities. Sine geography had caused most of the schools to be wide spread and in few numbers the responsibility of teaching their family came to rest on their shoulders. In 1783 Jefferson set out a plan to read to and teach his daughter because, “…the chance that in marriage she will draw a blockhead I calculate at about fourteen to one, and of course that the education of her family will probably rest on her own ideas and direction without assistance.” And these opportunities seemed to be protected by the laws which evened the legal status of women and men and allowed woman more say in professional and public life, which according to Boorstin wasn’t matched until the 20th century. 2. When Boorstin writes that “America lacked enthusiasm for the man of profound, detached, and “pure” intelligence,” he was referring back the American thought of the “divine average.” American thought wasn’t meant to be systematic and complicated because of the lack of need for the mind to “raise any man above men,” or to compete. As Crevecoeur said about America in 1782, there wasn’t the crowded feeling or the constant debating of parties, there was enough room and certainly enough opportunities for each man in America to take out this need to beat other people. And because of all this freedom and all of the rights, average in America was more like extraordinary back in Europe.
Chapter 30 1. The women in America were more advanced because they were given more freedom. Women were more active, outgoing, and successful in their events outside of the home or the kitchen. They were encouraged to learn and encourage schooling in their family and were even able to learn business, printing, publishing, medicine, and nursing. These opportunities for American women were very different than the women in England whose rights were much more restricted. 2. Americans did not look for the man of “pure intelligence” because it was not practical to their lifestyle. They used applicable knowledge and liked a man who had gained his knowledge through his life. Also, the Americans liked the idea of a “divine average” in which the New World gave opportunities to learn to everyone. It was an equal opportunity for everyone and seeking a man of pure intelligence would have created inequality in America.
1. Colonial rights of women were considered more advanced because they were more numerous, and allowed American women more freedom. As Boorstin states, "women in colonial America were more versatile, more active, more prominent, and on the whole more sucessful in activities outside the kitchen than were their English counterparts." Women were allowed to establish themselves outside of the home, as proven by the reasonable number of female printers and publishers, apothecaries and medical practitioners, merchants and tradeswomen, and partners in plantations. One reason for this was "scarcity of labor"---no matter what, necessary positions require filling, and sexism did not extend so far as to rob a social niche of a resident because of gender-related prejudices. Education of women also came into prominence, as women were expected to educate their children.
2. A man of "profound, detached and 'pure' intelligence" was useless in colonial America, because it was versatiliy, hard work and the sweat on your back that determined your place, not your education. The knowledge of algebra or physics could neither clear a forest nor plow a field, and were thus considered unecessary and useless in early colonial America. Even the educated men were required to be flexible in what they could accomplish: not only thought, but action. A man whose only worth was his mind was useless.
1. The rights of women from England and America were fairly unequal for this time period, mainly due to two facts: 1) There was no long-standing tradition of suppression of women, and 2) There was a need for women to be able to do some things outside of the household, thus, due more to need than for a real wish of more equal rights, women gained almost equal status as men. In England, however, there were longstanding orders and traditions, and women weren’t necessary in the workplace, thus they were delegated to be home makers, in contrast to America where they gained status enough to work outside of the home.
2. (It’s not my fault they didn’t like me.—I jest, I jest) As previously stated with the discussion of Physical Science, high education was not as highly prized in the colonies for a few reasons. First, there was little need for it, due to the great deal of work to be done, explorations and discoveries which had yet to be made on the simpler level, there was not a great need to be expounding upon the issues of other more developed areas, such as physics or geometry. From this, the need for practicality was more necessary in colonial life.
1. Describe how the colonial rights of women were considered more "advanced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century? Since the settlers lived on the fringe of the Empire and survival depended on chopping enough wood, harvesting enough crops, hunting enough game there was absolutely no room for sexism and everyone had to do their part for the survival of an individual settlement or colony.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain. The man of “pure intelligence” will not last long in a battle nor bring home game enough to survive.
1. Women in colonial America had more opportunities than women in Europe of the same time period: it was common for women to run businesses, be responsible for the education of their families, and help with manual jobs that had previously only been seen as male work. This was due to America’s relative infant state as a society, and the need for able workers was more important than upholding the old stereotype of feminine delicacy. Women, as a result, had more familial and business rights, rights that would not appear again in American society until the 20th century.
2. The American situation, especially the fact that it was a relatively new society and needed all the help it could get, meant that no person was too good to be of service to others, and people did not think that simply ideas, which had no obvious practical value, could separate a man from anyone else. In society, there was room for all types of proficiency, and all sorts of skills would be needed to make the colonies a success.
1. The colonial rights of women were more advanced than those of women in England at the same time because the English were stuck in a rut of tradition, where as the colonial social systems were more vague and undeveloped. Women in the colonies began becoming more educated, and they were more "succefull in activities outside of the kitchen..." (186)
2. A man of pure intelligence does not know how to go out into the field and plant crops, they dont know how to physically work. That is why pure intelligence was not viewed with enthusiam.
1. Describe how the colonial rights of women were considered more "advanced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century? Women had rights in colonial America for the same reason that women had rights in ancient nomadic societies: necessity. Women were needed to do work in order for the colonies to succeed, and therefore were on equal terms with the others. This is in contrast with England, where there was an elite aristocratic class who were so rich that the women were not needed for work, and could therefore be shut away.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain. As mentioned previously, lots of work was required for the colonies to survive. Therefore, men of higher education were mostly unnecessary. Their education was little use in a society where work was constant and mostly menial.
1. Describe how colonial rights of women were considered more "advaced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century? In England women had to stay home clean, and cook. They were almost forced to follow this. In America women had to help work in order for the colonies to develop faster and be able to survive.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for man of...'pure intelligence."' Explain. as said many times before me a man of pure intelligence has no way os surviving in the new world. This is because inorder for colonies to thrive, lots of work was required.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain. Although education was promoted in America, it was for a very different reason than in England. American education was a necesity to prepare people to make their own living in the New World, as opposed to English education, which sereved only to make gentlemen seem "accomplished." Men of "pure" inteligence, who would study only for the sake of studying, as an English gentleman would, had no place in American society. Mira Schlosberg.
26 comments:
1. In America, there were no set roles or trades as there were in England. There was only necessity. Women in England were forced into the house because of age-old traditions that dictated the house as where they belonged. In America, however, there were no such traditions, there was only the need to prosper, and so women worked alongside men in the American fight to maintain an existence. Early American laws also shared this view, showing no special application to a particular sex. That came later.
2. In America, high-education was of little use. Where could advanced physics or theology ever be useful in Colonial America? The only thing that was important in America was the knowledge of a trade. What mattered to the American man was proficiency. If a man could produce something useful, he could prosper in America, where no shackles of class distinction bound him as they would have in England.
1: The colonial rights of women were much more liberal compared to her contemporaries in England because in America there was no long standing tradition and belief that women were only made for making babies and being homeowners. In America there was only the goal of surviving and making money and not like in Europe where the men did this and the women were dainty and fragile. Women in America took rols of merchants, and tradeswomen working side by side along men.
2: in Colonial America there was no need for a scholar who has pure intelligence because there was no place in society for him. People in the Americas could pursue higher learning yes but they could not only focus on their studies because in America there was a need for prospering and thriving in a new place. America did not lack anything, they just decided to make up for it in other areas that did not involve giant books.
1. In colonial society, women definitely had great opportunity compared to the situation in England. While women in England were generally restricted to the home and housekeeping, women in America could use the house to their advantage. Since the man worked near the home, women were able to learn from them, and society in general was more open towards women in business. The desperation for work led to more acceptance as well, because it no longer seemed to matter who the money came from. Also, women in the colonies tended to learn more then than even in the 20th century. This was because it was expected that they educate their families.
2. When Boorstin says that America lacked enthusiasm for a man of... pure intelligence.." he meant that America was essentially failing to act. After all of the change that occurred during the transition to America, the people of America did not want any more change. A "regular" was now set in motion for their new home, and because it was comfortable, it was very hard to be motivated for any kind of change. They also were looking to step out of the spot light. The people of America simply wanted to stay in pattern for a while, and in that way, it really was just watered-down intelligence.
1. Women had a greater role in the colonies not because men saw them as equal, but rather men saw them as a source of labor to help survive. In England, it wasn't neccesary for a woman to work the fields just to get enough food to make income and feed the family (at least in the upper class, which didn't really exist in the colonies). A woman in England was expected to remain in the house all day and to rear the children based on the tradtions.
2. In the mojority of the Americas, a man who was mentally fit but physically lacking was no use at all in the fields. There wouldn't be a need for intellectuals until a division of labor had been met, which would allow for artisans and thinkers to emerge from the masses.
The rights of women in America were considered more advanced than women of England due to the fact that women in America were not confined to the home. In England the women had to stay in the home to cook, clean, and raise her children. However in America, since the population was so small everyone was needed to help with the farming and other responsibilities in order to survive. Later on the plantations the plantation owners wife was responsible for caring for the sick slaves. She acted as their doctor getting more recognition.
2. The society of America was one where there were no scholars because there was no need for them. The main objective of colonial America was to provide for its mother country and to produce enough for itself to survive. It had no time for books, there was only time for survival.
1. The circumstances of colonial America provided women with boundless liberties that had not been exercised in England, and would not resurface until the 1900s. The virgin state of the land and industry on it meant all hands had to be on deck. Items were manufactured in the house, leading to opportunities for women to learn crafts previously devoted to men. The introduction of the printing press caused a large number of female printers and publishers during this period. Men during the time even admitted the essential need of an industrious woman in order to be successful. The lack of proper schools and the isolated nature of the colonies also added the dependability of woman to educate the family. Despite the tremendous advances made in women’s rights during the colonial period, old preconceptions remained as Thomas Jefferson admitted the education of his daughter to be “considerably different from what I think would be most proper for her sex in any other country than America.
2. The force which spurred the colonies of America was, above all, practicality. In the New World, the extent and breadth of your knowledge in areas concerning philosophy and art mattered not. Instead, emphasis was placed on experience and actual ability to complete tasks in order to survive. Boorstin states that “men were judged by how well they performed rather than how much they knew…” It was this practical mentality which led to America’s lack of “enthusiasm for the man of ‘pure’ intelligence.”
1. The colonial rights of women were considered more advanced than the rights of European women because American women had a more diversified role. Even outside the kitchen, women had a useful purpose. Since the men worked near the home, women seized this as an opportunity to learn new crafts that in England were strictly for men. It came to be that the men needed the women's help in order to run his business and it was not uncommon to see large numbers of women printers, newspaper publishers, merchants, and tradeswomen. In the colonial period, it was not considered strange or out of place to see a working woman because the scarcity of labor removed the social prejudices.
2. "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure' intelligence" because it was becoming more common that the most specialized jobs did not require a degree to practice. In Europe, men studied long and hard in the university in order to obtain a medical degree; since no one wanted to be practiced on by an uneducated amateur, every man needed special training and a certificate of authenticity. However, with the lack of American universities, doctors without degrees were trusted. In America, every man rich or poor had the chance to become a doctor and since they relied on nature to cure their patients and didn't go to the drastic measures in order to make a medical discovery, their patients had more confidence in getting better with the colonial doctors. However, since not only the privileged were going into medicine, it created greater competition for the educated men and thus discouraged them in being enthusiastic about becoming a highly trained doctor.
1. The colonial rights of women were considered more advanced compared to conterparts in England because in America, there really were no set positions. In Europe, there were “liberal” arts, and “servile.” Customs such as these seemed “vague and artificial in America.” (pg 185). In America, men had to prepare for necessity, had to prepare for any “role.” “Although our knowledge is only fragmentary, evidence suggests women in colonial America were more versatile, more active, more prominent, and on the whole more successful in activities outside the kitchen than were their English counterparts.” (pg 186). Women in England due to tradition remained in the house doing housework and taking care of the children. In America, women had opportunities to be printers, newspaper publishers, apothecaries, general medical practitioners and more. Laws even, did not discriminate against gender for a time. In America, the need to prosper enabled women to work alongside men, maintaining survival and gaining new knowledge in the process.
2. A higher education gave you more knowledge and therefore more “power.” In America, there was not much necessity for higher learning. In America, the people needed to know how to survive and gain profit through farming or trade. “There is room for everybody in America; has he any particular talent, or industry? He exerts it to procure a livelihood and it succeeds.” (pg. 188). Prospering was the most important thing in America, not higher education of Theology, liberal arts, physical science, etc. Boorstin also mentions “a wholesome fear” people had of a more intelligent person, afraid they would “raise any man about men.” Due to this fear and Americans being more interested in survival and prosperity, America lacked this enthusiasm.
1. Women in colonial America had almost equal rights with men. Women had more rights in America than English women did at this time. The law protected women and gave them powers such as divorce and control of business. Women were also expected to be educated. . Women were responsible for the education of their children. If a woman was not educated, her children also would be poorly educated. Women had jobs outside of the home as well. There were many female printers and newspaper publishers. Women in New England would become merchants, while their sailor-husbands were at sea. In the New World, women worked just as hard as their husbands did. A family’s success depended on both the Mother and the Father both inside and outside the home.
2. A man of "pure intelligence" could not make it far in America during colonial times. Pure intelligence was able to help you in England, but not here. A man needed a work ethic as well as intelligence. To prosper in the New World you had to work hard. Intelligence meant nothing if you did not apply it. There were no theologians in America: one, because no one had time to sit around all day and ponder; and two, because there was little need for theologians. Americans focused on prosperity and community building rather than philosophy and theology.
1. Colonial women were granted more chance to learn things outside the house. Some women were able to become newspaper publishers and even medical practitioners. Women in New England became merchants when there husbands left for months on end. Women in colonial America were granted more rights because they had more opportunities to work. Men needed there wives to be able to run things on the plantations when he was away.
2. Boorstin feels that men in America are lacking the pure intelligence that one could find in Europe at this same time. This could be because in America there was a realm of possibilities, and Colonist didn’t feel so cut throat competitive as those in England did. In England you would become successful if you went to a University and became a prominent political figure. In contrary, Colonist found that they could be successful doing anything they wanted. They had more freedom.
1. Women in America had responsibilities that were not solely limited to household chores, unlike most women in England at the time. This was due in part to the fact that labor was scarce in the colonies and limiting laborers to men would restrict the possibilities of the colonies to expand. Because of the fact that men worked with household manufactures, women were also able to observe, learn the trade, and then help their husbands. Women were more frequently educated, to aid them in educating their own families. It was not only in practice, but also in law that women held more rights, such as the right to be involved in business, than that of their European counterparts.
2. “America lacked enthusiasm for the man of profound, detached, and “pure” intelligence.” This quote of Boorstin’s emphasizes the American ideal for a man that was a “jack-of-all-trades” and could perform many different jobs effectively as opposed to the European ideal of a man that could do one job flawlessly. Quite the opposite of profound, detached, and having pure intelligence, such as philosophers, Americans valued those who were practical, engaged, and had a more daily intelligence. It was also harder to become someone of the latter description because the college system in America at the time could not educate their students to reach that level of high-learning.
1. Since the women were needed in America, they worked alongside the men in order to survive, and so weren't expected to sit at home and rear children, like in England. If an area needs women, they usually aren't treated as inferior. If they don't, as in England's case, then the women become housebound and lose rights.
2. America didn't need a man of "pure intelligence". It needed a man who could work and was physically strong. Intelligence helped for knowing a trade, but being only smart did nothing to help you work to survive.
~Chris Sogge~ :)
1. Women had more rights in the colonies for several reasons. Their husbands and fathers would often work at home so wives and daughters could learn some from observation of their husband's work. Many women became printers and publishers on their own, not just continuing the work of a deceased husband. They often learned how to be in the medical field too. New England women could become merchants and traders to support themselves while seafaring husbands left. Mothers were responsible for teaching their children at home so they had to know a fair amount to be able to pass on the knowledge to their children. Some girls, such as Thomas Jefferson's daughter, Patsy, and Cotton Mather's Katherine, were taught Latin and Greek to be able to teach it to their own children. Women also had more rights of divorce in the colonies. In many other places it was far more difficult for women to get a divorce. Women were also featured more prominently in society and public life in the colonies than they were in the Old World. Their right were protected far more than the rights of the women under the English common law.
2. men of "pure intelligence" weren't put on a pedestal in the colonies like they were in England. The colonists didn't like to put one man above another because of their intelligence or lack thereof. There was room for everyone in America. It was also more necessary to be practical than anything else. "...has he any particular talent, or industry? he exerts it in order to procure a livelihood, and it succeeds" As Crevecoeur said, it was important in America for someone to have a talent or a practical skill to thrive, because being a skilled theologian wouldn't help you plow a field.
1.) The reason for the "advanced" treatment in the colonies was driven by need. Women were a neccessity to the survival of the colonies, therefore they worked with men as equals to keep the colonies operating. In England, women mostly worked in the house, but this wouldn't work in the americas because there wouldn't be a large enough work force to support the rapidly growing country.
2.) There was no need of "pure intellegence" in America because it had little practical use in everyday life. Life in America was based off of neccessity, and the only intellegence you needed was intellegence to get through the day.
1) Boorstin describes three reasons for the increase of women’s rights in America compared to that of England or the later 20th century. The first is that many professions were carried out much closer to the home, and thus it was much easier for the women to observe the man at work or even aid and take part in the daily duties. This allowed for women to participate in various professions. The second reason was that there was very little labor already due to the population and women simply had to help in more tasks than just what was considered “proper”. The final reason concerned the education of offspring. Because the distances to schoolhouses and such were so great, it became proper in America for women to educate their children, giving them more responsibilities.
2) Perhaps what Boorstin refers to by the lack of enthusiasm for “pure” intelligence is that the American philosophy is to just get it done, without much worry of efficiency or prior study. This goes back to the description of the Puritans when they first settled, they weren’t out to create some Zion; they were simply there to survive. That’s the reason why Americans didn’t worry about the college versus university distinction or other such issue. Practicality simply overweighed thoroughness in colonial America.
1. In the American colonies, life was based on necessity and practicality instead of tradition, so woman or man, they were useful at work.
2. In the colonies, trade and survival were the only major skills a man needed, so there was no need for a higher, university-level education.
1. While Boorstin acknowledges the fact that there were few accounts of women in colonial America, he states that woman in America had more opportunities and thus were more versatile and more successful/advanced in the society (outside of the kitchen). Most often, men worked in or close to the household which gave the women more of a chance to learn something. Sure there were a lot of women that took up work publishing newspapers and helping tend to fields because their husbands were away or dead, but more and more women were starting to take up work for their own reasons. Southern plantation workers needed their wives help to keep their business properly working, and accounts like that of William Byrd’s show that the there was a heavy reliance on woman. Because of the scarcity of labor woman were able to find work everywhere, and the “social prejudices” were practically removed. Another factor that played into woman’s roles being more advanced branched off of the system of colleges and universities. Sine geography had caused most of the schools to be wide spread and in few numbers the responsibility of teaching their family came to rest on their shoulders. In 1783 Jefferson set out a plan to read to and teach his daughter because, “…the chance that in marriage she will draw a blockhead I calculate at about fourteen to one, and of course that the education of her family will probably rest on her own ideas and direction without assistance.” And these opportunities seemed to be protected by the laws which evened the legal status of women and men and allowed woman more say in professional and public life, which according to Boorstin wasn’t matched until the 20th century.
2. When Boorstin writes that “America lacked enthusiasm for the man of profound, detached, and “pure” intelligence,” he was referring back the American thought of the “divine average.” American thought wasn’t meant to be systematic and complicated because of the lack of need for the mind to “raise any man above men,” or to compete. As Crevecoeur said about America in 1782, there wasn’t the crowded feeling or the constant debating of parties, there was enough room and certainly enough opportunities for each man in America to take out this need to beat other people. And because of all this freedom and all of the rights, average in America was more like extraordinary back in Europe.
Chapter 30
1. The women in America were more advanced because they were given more freedom. Women were more active, outgoing, and successful in their events outside of the home or the kitchen. They were encouraged to learn and encourage schooling in their family and were even able to learn business, printing, publishing, medicine, and nursing. These opportunities for American women were very different than the women in England whose rights were much more restricted.
2. Americans did not look for the man of “pure intelligence” because it was not practical to their lifestyle. They used applicable knowledge and liked a man who had gained his knowledge through his life. Also, the Americans liked the idea of a “divine average” in which the New World gave opportunities to learn to everyone. It was an equal opportunity for everyone and seeking a man of pure intelligence would have created inequality in America.
1. Colonial rights of women were considered more advanced because they were more numerous, and allowed American women more freedom. As Boorstin states, "women in colonial America were more versatile, more active, more prominent, and on the whole more sucessful in activities outside the kitchen than were their English counterparts." Women were allowed to establish themselves outside of the home, as proven by the reasonable number of female printers and publishers, apothecaries and medical practitioners, merchants and tradeswomen, and partners in plantations. One reason for this was "scarcity of labor"---no matter what, necessary positions require filling, and sexism did not extend so far as to rob a social niche of a resident because of gender-related prejudices. Education of women also came into prominence, as women were expected to educate their children.
2. A man of "profound, detached and 'pure' intelligence" was useless in colonial America, because it was versatiliy, hard work and the sweat on your back that determined your place, not your education. The knowledge of algebra or physics could neither clear a forest nor plow a field, and were thus considered unecessary and useless in early colonial America. Even the educated men were required to be flexible in what they could accomplish: not only thought, but action. A man whose only worth was his mind was useless.
1. The rights of women from England and America were fairly unequal for this time period, mainly due to two facts: 1) There was no long-standing tradition of suppression of women, and 2) There was a need for women to be able to do some things outside of the household, thus, due more to need than for a real wish of more equal rights, women gained almost equal status as men. In England, however, there were longstanding orders and traditions, and women weren’t necessary in the workplace, thus they were delegated to be home makers, in contrast to America where they gained status enough to work outside of the home.
2. (It’s not my fault they didn’t like me.—I jest, I jest) As previously stated with the discussion of Physical Science, high education was not as highly prized in the colonies for a few reasons. First, there was little need for it, due to the great deal of work to be done, explorations and discoveries which had yet to be made on the simpler level, there was not a great need to be expounding upon the issues of other more developed areas, such as physics or geometry. From this, the need for practicality was more necessary in colonial life.
1. Describe how the colonial rights of women were considered more "advanced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century?
Since the settlers lived on the fringe of the Empire and survival depended on chopping enough wood, harvesting enough crops, hunting enough game there was absolutely no room for sexism and everyone had to do their part for the survival of an individual settlement or colony.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain.
The man of “pure intelligence” will not last long in a battle nor bring home game enough to survive.
1. Women in colonial America had more opportunities than women in Europe of the same time period: it was common for women to run businesses, be responsible for the education of their families, and help with manual jobs that had previously only been seen as male work. This was due to America’s relative infant state as a society, and the need for able workers was more important than upholding the old stereotype of feminine delicacy. Women, as a result, had more familial and business rights, rights that would not appear again in American society until the 20th century.
2. The American situation, especially the fact that it was a relatively new society and needed all the help it could get, meant that no person was too good to be of service to others, and people did not think that simply ideas, which had no obvious practical value, could separate a man from anyone else. In society, there was room for all types of proficiency, and all sorts of skills would be needed to make the colonies a success.
1. The colonial rights of women were more advanced than those of women in England at the same time because the English were stuck in a rut of tradition, where as the colonial social systems were more vague and undeveloped. Women in the colonies began becoming more educated, and they were more "succefull in activities outside of the kitchen..." (186)
2. A man of pure intelligence does not know how to go out into the field and plant crops, they dont know how to physically work. That is why pure intelligence was not viewed with enthusiam.
1. Describe how the colonial rights of women were considered more "advanced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century?
Women had rights in colonial America for the same reason that women had rights in ancient nomadic societies: necessity. Women were needed to do work in order for the colonies to succeed, and therefore were on equal terms with the others. This is in contrast with England, where there was an elite aristocratic class who were so rich that the women were not needed for work, and could therefore be shut away.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain.
As mentioned previously, lots of work was required for the colonies to survive. Therefore, men of higher education were mostly unnecessary. Their education was little use in a society where work was constant and mostly menial.
1. Describe how colonial rights of women were considered more "advaced" compared her contemporaries in England, or the 20th century?
In England women had to stay home clean, and cook. They were almost forced to follow this. In America women had to help work in order for the colonies to develop faster and be able to survive.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for man of...'pure intelligence."' Explain.
as said many times before me a man of pure intelligence has no way os surviving in the new world. This is because inorder for colonies to thrive, lots of work was required.
2. Boorstin writes that, "America lacked enthusiasm for the man of... 'pure intelligence.'" Explain.
Although education was promoted in America, it was for a very different reason than in England. American education was a necesity to prepare people to make their own living in the New World, as opposed to English education, which sereved only to make gentlemen seem "accomplished." Men of "pure" inteligence, who would study only for the sake of studying, as an English gentleman would, had no place in American society.
Mira Schlosberg.
Post a Comment