Relationship between Emerson Transcendentalist Ideas and Fuller Feminism - Essay Example

Relationship between Emerson Transcendentalist Ideas and Fuller Feminism Introduction The placement of Fuller within the transcendentalist movement came after many considerations. However, Fuller’s arguments tend to not to agree with the arguments of several members of the transcendent since she had a different perspective on the moral nature of women. Emerson partly laid the foundation of his support for the rights of women on the conventional understanding. Both Emerson and Fuller advocated for the rights of women even though in varied ways. The essay seeks to explain the relationship between Emerson’s transcendentalist ideas and Fuller’s feminism. Fuller Feminism Until recently, the position taken by Fuller in relation to Transcendentalism garnered insignificant attention from the community of scholars. Fuller’s relegation to the circles of transcendentalists as a minor figure in her writing viewed as being digressive and difficult. She received the slightest attention that were majorly focusing on her biography. However, as the history of women increasingly gained interest, scholars like David Robinson and Bell Gale Chevigny have retrieved Fuller’s significant role in the circles of transcendentalist. In addition, Fuller’s critics have equally pursued her influence in the history of the rights of women. Some of her critics have gone as far as re-evaluating the style and rhetoric of her writings, specifically based on conversational and oral traditions and with an increasing internalization of the rhetoric strategies of women. In formulating an argument within the major elements of Fuller’s criticism, it is critical to position Fuller within the movement of the transcendentalist. Robinson asserts that Fuller’s founded her arguments for the rights of women on transcendentalist self-culture belief. At the same time, her arguments proved problematic due to the presence of evidence of lack of agreement between Fuller and other transcendentalists concerning women’s moral nature. Sandra Gustafson claims that Fuller rightly changes the premises of the cult of real womanhood to encompass a radical argument than other transcendentalists. As realized by both Davis and Gustafson, Fuller does not agree to base her argument on vital differences in gender between men and women. She cultivates an argument that comes closer to the modern understanding of the socially constructed gender roles. Mainly, Fuller declines the common belief that women have a moral nature that is superior. By carefully examining the cultural understandings that dominate the nature of women and the origin of this argument, it is evident that transcendentalists and other women’s rights reformers integrated these beliefs into women’s rights arguments. Equally, by comparison of this argument to woman visualized by Fuller in the 19th century, it is evident how Fuller repositions her argument to evade the pitfall of her contemporary arguments for the rights of women. She fixes this by getting rid of the premise of women’s moral nature superiority in the argument. In its place, Fuller uses an argument to justify the advancement of women as the creation of the human potential. By this, Fuller shows the rights of women not as being an antagonist to men, but as essentially linked, given that both women and men have shared similar human nature. Dominant understanding of the roles of women in the 19th century realized a clear expression in the cult of real womanhood though it had its origins in the long tradition of essential gender difference. The long tradition in the culture of the West spotted women chiefly with the body and men with the mind. Since the mind controls the body, there was a consideration that the nature of women had been inferior to that of men and roles of women to be subordinate to the roles of men. In the 19th century, increased division occurred between the work of men and women because of industrialism. Increased linkage of woman’s sphere of influence to the home took place. The belief at that time became that the nature of women fitted them best for the domestic roles. The functioning of a woman as a wife and as a mother reduced her potential to become powerful that her husband. Issues such as sympathy, altruism, spirituality, and selflessness proved the basis for identifying women (Maslan, 42). Emerson Transcendentalist Ideas Transcendentalists became traditional in their acceptance of the fundamental gender differences of women despite the theological revisions. With the inclusion of supposed superior moral nature. Nonetheless, most of the time, they supported the rights of women, just as they supported the rights of Indians and slaves. Transcendentalists did not believe in public activism as being a good way of achieving their goals. The extent to which transcendentalist can be viewed to support women rights is evident from the acceptance of Fuller as an intellectual in the circle, together with several other women. Emerson received a lot of criticism and people referred to him as being antifeminist. Emerson’s positions on the equality of gender looked to have been fraught with ambivalence. Larry Reynolds and Christina Zwarg argue that Fuller received significant support from Emerson. Zwarg goes further and says that Fuller with Emerson had a complex, interactive and mutually empowering relationship (Zwarg, 1995). Emerson respected the intellectual capabilities of Fuller. Emerson’s theory of independence and being self-reliant significantly empowered women, and Fuller witnessed massive success under the teachings of Emerson. In addition, Reynolds explains the radical understanding of gender by Emerson as being masculine, fluid and feminine mingling and flowing with one another within a given person. Further, Emerson valued qualities of women that were traditional such as intuition over the male traditional qualities of understanding and reason as being the greater way of knowing. On the other hand, Emerson’s opinions may seem encouraging to women, but in a real sense, they reinforce traditional stereotypes of masculinity and femininity resulting in his labeling by Margaret Vanderhaar Alien as being antifeminist. To his contemporaries, Emerson appeared as an enlightened and progressive thinker on issues related to the affairs of women’s rights, despite the fact that in reality, Emerson was antifeminist and highly conventional. Fuller finally denounces Emerson as being a hypocrite claiming that Emerson’s impressive exhortations about the independence of spirit and self-reliance did not benefit women. She further argues that Emerson perceived women as being primarily adjuncts to himself. Fuller’s appraisal appears to reduce the thoughts of Emerson. Indeed, labeling Emerson as being an anti-feminist makes use of contemporary standards anachronistically, making no distinction between the progressive elements of Emerson’s thought about women and people who held strong beliefs about women’s inferiority. It is clear that Emerson experienced challenges differentiating between sex and gender. In contrast, Fuller’s unconventional experiences permitted her to remind Emerson that the sex of an individual though looking fatal in nature, should not be restrictive to one’s life. Emerson’s view of the rights of women compares with disappointments to the view expressed by Fuller. These are because Emerson fails to question conventional theories on women’s nature. These beliefs are clearly expressed in the speech of Emerson at the Boston 1855 convention for women right. At the beginning of his address, Emerson laid the premise of his point of view in the belief in men and women natures. Emerson goes further and says that women are more tied to the body that men, they are more delicate compared to men. Emerson opines that the identification results to the particular virtues held by women. Emerson continues to argue that the general voice of human beings have agreed that women have their strengths. These strengths are by sentiment; that equal mental height attained by husbands by toil is reached by women due to sympathy from their husband. Emerson goes further and claims that whereas man is the will, a woman is the sentiment. The sympathy intuition granted by Emerson to women enables them to learn so fast and deliver the result quickly so as to outpace the logic of their slow brother. Emerson takes an unexpected turn in his address by not applying conventional beliefs. Emerson claims that women deserve the opportunity to take per whatever they wish. Emerson argues that women have a right that is not questionable on their properties. Emersion concludes his speech by pressing for the better education of men instead of women. He claims that men should need better education to take care of their women. In spite of the enormous claims, Emerson makes for expansion of women’s right, his claim cannot be fully sustained due to internal flaws. The conclusion of his address leaves women in the place of dependence. Emerson’s arguments for rights of women based on the conventional understanding of moral values of women seem to have been representative of his followers. Conclusion In conclusion, it is clear that transcendentalist ideas of Emerson and the feminist ideas of Fuller were complementary and different at certain circumstances. Both Fuller and Emerson had advocated for women’s rights but with different intentions. Emerson advocated for the rights of women based on most of the principles of conventionally understanding. Fuller supported women’s self-reliance and independence. There are differences in the arguments of both writers on the side they have taken concerning the rights of women. References Maslan, M. (2001). Whitman Possessed: Poetry, Sexuality, and Popular Authority. Baltimore: Johns HopkinsUP. Zwarg, C. (1995). Feminist Conversations: Fuller, Emerson, and the Play of Reading. Ithaca: Cornell UP. Read More