Victorians
Apr. 3rd, 2010 04:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
There are two things I love about history: finding surprising or delightful people or events, notes of grace (all the lovelier because history, as a whole, is not graceful), and running across bits that don't fit - that point to lacunae in your own knowledge, or in received history, or in knowledge of history as a whole.
I had one of these experiences a few weeks ago, reading Louisa May Alcott's Eight Cousins and Rose in Bloom. Eight Cousins is actually a bit dull, but Rose in Bloom is cracking good, with surprisingly well-developed and conflicted characters, a good clip on its plot, and a sweet romance (in which the hero proves his manliness by writing a book of poetry. Be still my heart!).
But what caught my attention in this instance is a minor secondary character, a Chinese immigrant named Fun See who moves in the social circles of our heroine, Rose, and -
"Oh, Mac! Annabel has just confided to me that she is engaged to Fun See! Think of her going to housekeeping in Canton someday and having to order rats, puppies, and bird's-nest soup for dinner," whispered Rose, too much amused to keep the news to herself.
"By Confucius! Isn't that a sweet prospect?" And Mac burst out laughing, to the great surprise of his neighbors, who wondered what there was amusing about the Chinese sage.
Okay, so it doesn't radiate racial sensitivity. But, while Rose and Mac think the engagement is entertaining, they aren't a bit shocked or offended by it; and there isn't any sense in the text that Alcott thinks she's doing anything daring, or that a white upper-class girl marrying a Chinese man would offend anyone.
And - why? The only thing I know about the history of the Chinese in 19th century America - the only thing I thought there was to know - is the history of the Chinese on the West coast, and I was distinctly under the impression that white people frowned on mixed marriages. So why, in an inoffensive children's book published in 1876, is it all right Annabel to marry Fun See?
And that's the lovely thing about studying history: because it shows you constantly that the world is much wider than you know.
(And when I figure out why the good ship Annabel/Fun See can sail, I'll be sure to let you know.)
I had one of these experiences a few weeks ago, reading Louisa May Alcott's Eight Cousins and Rose in Bloom. Eight Cousins is actually a bit dull, but Rose in Bloom is cracking good, with surprisingly well-developed and conflicted characters, a good clip on its plot, and a sweet romance (in which the hero proves his manliness by writing a book of poetry. Be still my heart!).
But what caught my attention in this instance is a minor secondary character, a Chinese immigrant named Fun See who moves in the social circles of our heroine, Rose, and -
"Oh, Mac! Annabel has just confided to me that she is engaged to Fun See! Think of her going to housekeeping in Canton someday and having to order rats, puppies, and bird's-nest soup for dinner," whispered Rose, too much amused to keep the news to herself.
"By Confucius! Isn't that a sweet prospect?" And Mac burst out laughing, to the great surprise of his neighbors, who wondered what there was amusing about the Chinese sage.
Okay, so it doesn't radiate racial sensitivity. But, while Rose and Mac think the engagement is entertaining, they aren't a bit shocked or offended by it; and there isn't any sense in the text that Alcott thinks she's doing anything daring, or that a white upper-class girl marrying a Chinese man would offend anyone.
And - why? The only thing I know about the history of the Chinese in 19th century America - the only thing I thought there was to know - is the history of the Chinese on the West coast, and I was distinctly under the impression that white people frowned on mixed marriages. So why, in an inoffensive children's book published in 1876, is it all right Annabel to marry Fun See?
And that's the lovely thing about studying history: because it shows you constantly that the world is much wider than you know.
(And when I figure out why the good ship Annabel/Fun See can sail, I'll be sure to let you know.)
no subject
Date: 2010-04-04 03:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-04-04 06:34 pm (UTC)It occurs to me that all the material I've seen on the Chinese in America in the 19th C is about laboring Chinese; it's quite possible intelligentsia level Chinese were seen as quite a different thing. Certainly it would remove some of the economic causes of resentment.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-04 06:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-04-04 06:19 pm (UTC)(Also, your icon makes me smile every time I see it. Robin Hood DESERVES to be fangirled, especially when he's a fox.)
no subject
Date: 2010-04-04 06:50 pm (UTC)And what are you talking about, Robin Hood is always a fox. :DDD
no subject
Date: 2010-04-06 12:34 am (UTC)I find LMA's prose so cloying as to be almost unreadable sometimes. Other times, I skip past the morals and am able to have fun with the story. I like Eight Cousins and Rose in Bloom better than almost any of her other books, barring Little Women.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-06 02:17 am (UTC)