If you're at all interested in women's history, and social or intellectual history in general, this is an absolutely fascinating read. A must-read if you’re writing fiction or non-fiction in this field.
I'm absolutely sure the reason this remarkable dinner has "faded from memory" is that persistent patriarchal habit of refusing to admit even very successful-in-their-time women to the canon (in this case, the canon of history, as it were).
And the Victorian canon still shapes our own gaze: our own ideas and assumptions of how that time worked.
Hi Patricia, I have the full list - just didn’t want to drown my poor readers in 100 names! However, a lot of women are listed with just their surnames. I am reasonably confident in my identification of most of them; there are around 10 where I am making an educated guess, or where there are a couple of possibilities. I will be doing more posts on this and will put the full list up when I have done some more work on the men.
Thank you Lizzie, for drawing my attention to this event. I'm tempted to say, 'Those were the days' but of course those are still the days today. When you count the handful of women pioneers in medicine, in the theatre, in the arts, over a hundred years ago, it is sobering to realise that today, we still see fame and fortune unequally distributed. But perhaps that calls into question the benefits of fame and fortune.
Of course it's nice to be quoted in the Times, or the Guardian - to have ones portrait in the National Portrait Gallery, or to be installed in some hall of fame somewhere. Of course its nice to earn a decent wage. But perhaps women have long ago decided to go their own way. To try to be honorary men is a hide into nothing. The world of women is different and I'm quite pleased it is.
These days, now that I'm semi-retired, I am free to write about the things that I consider important. I am no longer beholden to the press or a salary to do so. I wish I'd done this earlier. Perhaps the women who didn't appear on the guest list in the 1890's, or who remain un-feted today are the ones we need to consider as well.
Did anybody refuse the invitation? Did anybody bring another wowan rather than another man?
I can't help seeing the disgraceful goings-on in many countries today as the result of women joining a male world, being complicit in the old ways, rather than creating a better world on their terms instead.
We still have some excellent women pioneers who have ploughed their own furrows. Im thinking of Polly Toynbee or Nancie Pelosi - to name but two famous and forunate women. But there are others - less well known, for example the Just Stop Oil protester Gaie Delap. I doubt whether Delap would have been invited to the dinner - but she should have been!
Hi Wendy, thanks for your interest in this. Yes, I am drawn to the dinner for a number of reasons - who was there, who wasn't, who has been remembered, who has been forgotten and what conclusions can be drawn as a result. Based on who was there, it would suggest that there were class / snobbery factors at play in compiling the guest list; and there are references to women turning down the invitation, though no specific names. Representation and participation are areas I am going to explore in later posts.
So interesting, Lizzie, fantastic research on your part, and I particularly like that you say: 'Finally, because we know in most cases the name of the man each woman chose as her distinguished dinner date, the event gives a unique insight into professional relationships and personal friendships.' Often we forget (I do!) that there were lots of men who were very sympathetic to women in higher education, science & the professions & actively helped them.
Yes I have certainly found a lot of men who were very supportive of women but if you read their entries in the ODNB, for example, this is rarely mentioned, probably because the women's stories are not known. So, Thomas Hughes helped Emma Cons set up a chain of coffee shops but there is no reference to their relationship in anything I have read about him.
PS Thanks also for the link to my Cambridge Ladies' Dining Society post on the 1897 riots! The woman cyclist effigy was so clearly a manifestation of fears about the New Woman.
I thought I knew a lot about women in Victorian England, but this gala dinner had completely passed me by. What a fascinating story, thank you
Thanks Sarah - glad you enjoyed it!
Fascinating
https://open.substack.com/pub/womenwhomeantbusiness/p/quite-the-reverse-of-celebrated?r=1pi2kz&utm_medium=ios
Thanks Alison! There is a second instalment if you are interested.
If you're at all interested in women's history, and social or intellectual history in general, this is an absolutely fascinating read. A must-read if you’re writing fiction or non-fiction in this field.
I'm absolutely sure the reason this remarkable dinner has "faded from memory" is that persistent patriarchal habit of refusing to admit even very successful-in-their-time women to the canon (in this case, the canon of history, as it were).
And the Victorian canon still shapes our own gaze: our own ideas and assumptions of how that time worked.
I just loved this story, I wonder where the full list of guests would be found.................
Hi Patricia, I have the full list - just didn’t want to drown my poor readers in 100 names! However, a lot of women are listed with just their surnames. I am reasonably confident in my identification of most of them; there are around 10 where I am making an educated guess, or where there are a couple of possibilities. I will be doing more posts on this and will put the full list up when I have done some more work on the men.
Thank you Lizzie, for drawing my attention to this event. I'm tempted to say, 'Those were the days' but of course those are still the days today. When you count the handful of women pioneers in medicine, in the theatre, in the arts, over a hundred years ago, it is sobering to realise that today, we still see fame and fortune unequally distributed. But perhaps that calls into question the benefits of fame and fortune.
Of course it's nice to be quoted in the Times, or the Guardian - to have ones portrait in the National Portrait Gallery, or to be installed in some hall of fame somewhere. Of course its nice to earn a decent wage. But perhaps women have long ago decided to go their own way. To try to be honorary men is a hide into nothing. The world of women is different and I'm quite pleased it is.
These days, now that I'm semi-retired, I am free to write about the things that I consider important. I am no longer beholden to the press or a salary to do so. I wish I'd done this earlier. Perhaps the women who didn't appear on the guest list in the 1890's, or who remain un-feted today are the ones we need to consider as well.
Did anybody refuse the invitation? Did anybody bring another wowan rather than another man?
I can't help seeing the disgraceful goings-on in many countries today as the result of women joining a male world, being complicit in the old ways, rather than creating a better world on their terms instead.
We still have some excellent women pioneers who have ploughed their own furrows. Im thinking of Polly Toynbee or Nancie Pelosi - to name but two famous and forunate women. But there are others - less well known, for example the Just Stop Oil protester Gaie Delap. I doubt whether Delap would have been invited to the dinner - but she should have been!
Good luck with the substack and the work.
Hi Wendy, thanks for your interest in this. Yes, I am drawn to the dinner for a number of reasons - who was there, who wasn't, who has been remembered, who has been forgotten and what conclusions can be drawn as a result. Based on who was there, it would suggest that there were class / snobbery factors at play in compiling the guest list; and there are references to women turning down the invitation, though no specific names. Representation and participation are areas I am going to explore in later posts.
Jolly good. I will read with interest.
So interesting, Lizzie, fantastic research on your part, and I particularly like that you say: 'Finally, because we know in most cases the name of the man each woman chose as her distinguished dinner date, the event gives a unique insight into professional relationships and personal friendships.' Often we forget (I do!) that there were lots of men who were very sympathetic to women in higher education, science & the professions & actively helped them.
Yes I have certainly found a lot of men who were very supportive of women but if you read their entries in the ODNB, for example, this is rarely mentioned, probably because the women's stories are not known. So, Thomas Hughes helped Emma Cons set up a chain of coffee shops but there is no reference to their relationship in anything I have read about him.
PS Thanks also for the link to my Cambridge Ladies' Dining Society post on the 1897 riots! The woman cyclist effigy was so clearly a manifestation of fears about the New Woman.