Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Gender Comparison

Young girls and young boys seem to play very different roles in nineteenth century American literature. Though both genders are to be viewed as role models, the lessons the characters teach are very different. After reading Ragged Dick, I got to see how boys are represented in literature, and how it compares to the ways girls are represented.

From past readings, young girls have been depicted as dependent. Whether it is that they are always learning from an adult, or being saved by someone, girls come across as being needy and reliant. Little boys, on the other hand, seem to be more independent. In Ragged Dick, Dick must be self-sufficient by making his own money and striving to survive on the streets. This situation would be extremely difficult to find a little girl character in. To help himself, Dick works as a boot shiner. His job was best described in the text when the narrator states, “The boots were soon polished in Dick’s best style, which proved very satisfactory, our hero being a proficient in the art.” To compare Dick to a girl character, I choose Ellen Montgomery from The Wide, Wide World. Ellen had nothing to worry about but making toast and learning about religion. Dick, however, had to worry about bigger issues like where he was sleeping or what he could afford to eat. Nineteenth century authors seem to give boys more challenges to struggle with than girls. With this in mind, it is easy to see how girls represent dependency, while boys symbolize independency.

After reading the excerpt from Ragged Dick, I believe that young boys in literature are meant to be relatable. Whether it is the main character, or a secondary character, all walks of life seem to be represented. In Ragged Dick, there is Dick, the poor boy trying to find his way. On the other end of the spectrum, there is Frank who symbolizes the upper class young boy. So whether the reader is in the upper or lower class of society, they will have a character to relate to. This is obviously a rhetorical device used to capture an audience and make the narrative more realistic. I am not sure that all nineteenth century stories about little boys are like this, but Ragged Dick backs up this conclusion.

4 comments:

  1. I like how you pointed out that the two little boys were so "relate-able" to the readers. I hadn't thought of that before! I also agree with you with the fact that little girls were depicted as being completely dependent, in almost every way, which is unfortunate!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with your depiction of girls being dependent and boys being independent. It kind of stinks to think about given the age we live in now but the stories we have read seem to enforce it more. Good depiction.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I said pretty much the same thing. Boys are independent; relying on themselves to survive. Girls are dependent on others, ie for financial and emotional support. Earlier in this class, we defined children based on their dependency...so far, our boys haven't been "children" in the eyes of our 19th century conceptions of the time. Am I missing something?

    ReplyDelete
  4. In my posting I wrote about the similarities between Capitola and Dick, even though Capitola is a girl and Dick is a boy. Both have found jobs to support themselves to at least have food everyday. In no way does Capitola depend on anyone to help her. She is completely independent, just as Dick is. I just found it interesting that she is the exception to the rule.

    ReplyDelete