Posted on by Ellen Roussel

Shortchanging the Janitress

Last week, Katie and Clara both discussed the philanthropy efforts, or lack thereof, of the Woman’s Literary Club of Baltimore. Since I have currently been transcribing the formation and early establishment of the Club, it was interesting and insightful for me to read their thoughts on the generosity of the Club in later years and as evident (or not) through the programs.

It wasn’t until I made my way into the second season of the Club’s existence that I began seeing any mention of philanthropy in the minutes. Around the November 1891 entries, the President puts in the motion to raise money for the janitress of the Academy of Sciences building who recently lost most of her belongings in a fire. The women second and third the motion, and agree to inquire whether or not she can be helped.

Several meetings later, the President again announces that a purse will be collected for the janitress to which the ladies can contribute if they so desire. Almost within the same breath it seems, the President moves on to more pressing announcements of upcoming classes. Eventually, we make our way to December 1891, where it is reported that $16.00 was raised for the janitress, which falls short of the $25.00 goal. Then, the women speculate on whether they should buy the janitress a sewing machine to replace the one she lost in the fire, which would require them to supplement the addition funds from their own budget, or, if they should just give her the $16.

The women then debate whether they should just give her the money because it probably would not be “judiciously spent” or if they should buy the “very-useful” sewing machine, and possibly risk losing $9 from their ample funds. After all, as the women say, they are not a philanthropy club and “must be just before [they] are generous.”

It was eventually decided that a decision of this gravity (whether or not to help a woman in need) was too much of a mature consideration for that meeting, so they postponed the decision until a later time.

I have not yet reached the meeting where the decision is resolved, but let me tell you, I am truly waiting with baited breath to see what kind of convoluted decision they make in regards to someone a little less fortunate than them.

Posted on by Ellen Roussel

Club and their associations

I have completed transcribing the minutes from the first year and a half of the Woman’s Literary Club, and have been given a detailed view of the inner workings of the Club as they try to establish themselves and their methods of operating as a unit. What I do not have a good perspective on, however, is the Club as an external piece; as in, how does the Club operate within Baltimore, and how does it compare to other women’s groups during this time.

In the March 31st Board Meeting minutes, the President made the suggestion that the Club rent a house, and open it up to lodgers and the neighborhood when Club meetings were not in session. To this thought, some of the women thought that other women’s groups in Baltimore could unite with them in establishing a house that would benefit them all. This seems to suggest the Club wished to associate with other women’s societies in Baltimore.

Looking at other minutes, some of the ladies suggested that women college graduates in the city might be lonely, and that a list of their names should be kept for individuals within the Club to contact them should they feel so inclined. This seems to be an example of when the Club does not want to associate with women who are not linked to another society. I don’t know if this is because it could be risky for the reputation of the Club to associate with these non-Club women, or what, but I am interested to see the development of how the Club asserts themselves within Baltimore and how they interact with other women not in the Club.

Posted on by Ellen Roussel

Early grapplings

I must admit I came into this project with some preconceived notions about the Woman’s Literary Club of Baltimore. After an entire semester taking a class called American Feminist Public Intellectuals, in which we thoroughly grappled with the ideas of authority and identity and how these are influenced by gender, race, education level, and even appearance, I found myself resenting the Woman’s Literary Club. After all, it is a group of primarily (totally??) middle- to upper-class, educated, white women gathering to assert their literary prowess and celebrate their intellectual accomplishments. To me, some of the cluckings of the Club seem rather frivolous when considered against the social and historical background of this time period. Some women, primarily black women, do not have the same advantages during this time period, and I find it difficult not to resent a club that claims to promote the intellectual development amongst women of “similar tastes.” Were there any black women in the Club at this time? Would an educated black woman even be allowed in? What are these “similar tastes” in regards to, and who determines if they are enough to let an individual into the Club? I do realize that I have a rather cynical view of the Club. For me, my personal challenge with this project will be to set aside my own initial views and opinions, and approach the Club with an open mind so as not to belittle their grand-scheme accomplishments. After spending some time with the 1890 minutes written by Eliza Ridgely, the first secretary of the Club, I don’t know that I can say that I have done a complete 180 in terms of this sour taste in my mouth in regards to the Club. However, I will say that it is a pretty grand and significant thing to be able to interact with these women in this medium. I look forward to continuing to peer through this window in history as the Club takes its form in the early years of its development.