Late 19th century question?

Question

Does anyone have any good websites or knowledge about women in Jane Austen period dramas? The rich women: What were their purpose? Did they get education? Could they say their own thoughts? Could they save men from danger? Were they allowed to have no interest/ability in playing the piano, drawing, needlework etc..?

Answer 1

of course, the lifestyles and opportunities of women inthat period were vastly more enviable than those of poor working class women.  As with any historical period, the happiness of individuals would naturally depend on their individual circustances, but it is a common conception that, although privillaged and economically secure, the lives of well to do women in that time were constrained by social expectations, often imposed on them by other women. Austen illustrates this inthe stereotypical portyrayals of women, and this is something found in most good authors of the period such as George Eliot and Thomas Hardy.  Flaubert's Madame Bovary is a good example of a woman who, although not a particularly "good" person, attempts to break free of social limits.  To conform to the expected opinions and pursuits was all well and good, to deviate was suspiscious and distrusted.  It was generally assumed that women had brains suited to runing a home, or, if wealthy, sitting back and instructing others to run their home, while men were entrusted with the business of running countries and fighting wars - with apparently little success!  Don't get me wrong, society and its rules were just as constricting for men, though in different ways. There are many modern parallels with Asian cultures.

I think an interesting example of this whole thing is the work of Beatrice Webb, English social reformer and diarist.  She definitely thought outside the box, and challenged many of the social norms of her time, but of course had the advantage from the off of having been born wealthy and educated.

I think education depended on a family's approach: some sent their children off to be educated, others didn't.  For the "upper classes" education was mainly a segregated affair, while for the "lower classes" it was comon for both boys and girls to be huddled together in one small building, recieving the ame education.

Answer 2

for a start it was late 18th century early 19th century, there purpose was to marry as well as possible and have children.  They were educated enough to be able to read and write, so they could write letters to there friends, and perhaps invertations and thank you notes during the social season.  It was unlikley they were allowed to think for themselves, if they had any political ideas, it was expected they would be the same as father/husband, to have a mind of her own was almost scandulous.  She might be allowed to nurse her husband and children if they were ill or injured, but no one else.  Saving a man fron Danger, very doubtful, If such a thing did happen the world would be told it was the other way around.  Her leasure would have consisted of playing music, needlework, and painting.  She was expected to look pretty and marry, and have babies. that was her life.  Jane Austin was an exceptional woman for her time, and the fact that she became a published author was amazing, more so because she did not use a male name like the Bronte sisters, and George Elliot.  her first novel Sense and Sensibility was published as "by A Lady"

Answer 3

Not much education unless they could buy it. They were to keep quiet in company. No they could definitly not save men from danger. Not even themselves. They have to have a man to do it for them. They could play the piano, draw and do needlework.